Form | Formule 1 APPLICATION ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE DEMANDE ineeiere Secon Bes omen emomn net 1420289 East/ Est ee ee Cee osTortrey nn BO at Fe No (noun Resion/ Région 1 eu desir do cour (6 6 conny) BETWEEN: | ENTRE HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN / SA MAJESTE LA REINE sand / et = MICHAEL DUFFY (Gotendants) 1 eeenaearo) 1. APPLICATION HEARING DATE AND LOCATION DATE ET LIEU DE L’AUDIENCE SUR LA DEMANDE Application hearing date: Friday, May 8, 2015 Date de faudience surla demande Time 10:00 a.m. Heure Courtroom number: 33. Numéro de ta salle d'audionce Court address: 161 Elgin Street, Ottawa, Ontario Adresse de la Cour — 2, LIST CHARGES LISTE DES ACCUSATIONS {__ Charge Information / Renseignements sur les accusations - ] ‘Type of Appearance (eg. tral date, ‘Set date, pro-rial mooting, ote) Description of Charge Sect. No. Next Court Date _| Type de comparution (p. ex, date Description de accusation Articien® | Prochaino date d'audience | de rocés, établissement dune date, conférence préparatoire au _ - procés, otc) fraud under $5,000 (7 counts) 380(1)(a)|May 4, 2015 Trial _ [breach of trust (15 counts) 422 May 4, 2045 [Trial 380(1) =| fraud over $5,000 (7 counts) (b) May 4, 2015 Trial being a member of Parliament did corruptly accept money in respect of | | anything done or omitted in his official capacity 119(1)(a)|May 4, 2015 [Trial being an official in the Senate accept money from Nigel Wright, a person having dealings with the government of Canada 124(1)(c)|May 4, 2015 Trial 3. NAME OF APPLICANT NOM DE L'AUTEUR DE LA DEMANDE Michael Duffy COR-OGH (rev. 04112) C804, CHECK ONE OF THE TWO BOXES BELOW: COCHEZ LA CASE QUI CONVIENT CI-DESSOUS CZ 1am appearing in person. My address, fax or email for service is as follows: Je comparals on personne. Mon adresse, mon numéro de télécopieur ou mon adresse électronique aux fins de signification sont Tes suivants [Ihave a legal representative who will be appearing. The address, fax or email for service of my legal representative is as follows: Jai un représontant juridique qui sera présent. L’adresse, le numéro de télécopiour ou Fadresse électronique de mon représentant juridique aux fins de signification sont les suivants Donald B. Bayne Peter K. Doody Bayne, Sellar, Boxall Borden, Ladner, Gervais LLP 500-200 Elgin St. 1300-100 Queen Street Ottawa, ON K2P 4L5 Ottawa, ON K1P 1J9 tel: 613-235-0535 tel: 613-787-3510 fax: 613-236-6958 email pdoody@blg.com fax 613-230-8842 con-oGi (ev. 042) 80APPLICATION DEMANDE (Rule 21, Criminal Rules ofthe Ontario Gout of ustee) (Regie 2.1, Regis do procedure en mate caine dea Cur de akon as TOnkarg PAGE 5. CONCISE STATEMENT OF THE SUBJECT OF APPLICATION BREVE DECLARATION DE L'OBJET DE LA DEMANDE (Bie state wny you ar snging tne Appin For example, “Tis gn pple fe an order acing tet’ This is anappleaon for an ede regung he Crown to close specied documents, or"Th Is an sppeaton tan ode aayng tha charge for deay) (Explqver event purge vous diposes a demande. Pa erence Isat dune demande @oronnancedacuroment du procs », «I 99 ne demande Sordomanceexgean Ges Courcare qvote Grup es documents rs oC I sot ce nade dorama dantaion Se faceseeec cre es ret») This is an application for the following orders: 1. An order establishing a procedure to be followed for the determination of this application, whereby: (a) the custodian of the documents sought by this application as outlined below ("the subject documents"), for which a claim of Parliamentary privilege will apparently be made, provide within a period of time to be established: (i) the category of Parliamentary privilege relied upon to prevent the production of the subject documents; (ii) the evidentiary and other materials relied upon in support of the claim of Parliamentary privilege; and (iii) a factum in support of its claim of Parliamentary privilege; (b) the accused and the Crown provide within a further period of time to be established: (i) any further evidentiary and other materials relied upon in support of its position that Parliamentary privilege does not prevent the production to the accused of the subject documents; and (ii) a factum responding to the custodian's claim of Parliamentary privilege, as sot out in his materials and factum; and {c) a date be set upon which this application will be heard by Justice Vaillancourt; 2. An order requiring that Charles Robert, the Clerk of the Senate, produce to the accused the following document or documents: (a) the internal report referred to by Jill Anne Joseph in her statement of 2013-09018 ("the Joseph statement") at page 7, line 18 as "my little report"; (b) her “draft report on Duffy" and all of its "iterations" referred to on page 10 of the Joseph statement; (c) her “draft report" referred to on page 11, lines 28-29, of the Joseph statement, (d) the “internal audit study" referred to in the statement of Gary O'Brien dated 2013-09- 18 ("the O'Brien statement) at page 7, line 1; (d) the “full original audit report” referred to on page 36, line 23 of the O'Brien statement; (e) the report referred to at page 36, line 18 of the O'Brien statement; and (f) “Jill Anne's Internal Audit Report or Internal Audit" referred to on page 37 at lines 21- 25 of the O'Brien statement. 6. GROUNDS TO BE ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION MOTIFS QUI SERONT INVOQUES A L'APPUI DE LA DEMANDE (Bray st tbe grounds you rely on n supsor this Appt, For example, I equre an acjoummen! because am sched ‘ne a schodvod to star The dacosue provided by the Grown doce note the polos nots laken a ha scent $ico the ayng oft charge tat has caused me preuse.) (Enumérez briévement is mots que vous invequoz&T3pou! dela demande. Par ample «J besoin dun eoumemont parce que je dos sub une intervention melee ow prev pour début du proces. « Les documents dguos parla Couanre re contanrent pases nas des foes fees ste toon es Un ‘etard excess ese dbp0 des accusations qui ma cause un prado») The subject documents are relevant to these proceedings and are not protected by Parliamentary privilege. have a mesial opraton the day areas Boon uneasonabie Joy 7. DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE SPECIFIC FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE APPLICATION DECLARATION DETAILLEE DES FAITS PRECIS SUR LESQUELS SE FONDE LA DEMANDE See the next page, entitled: "Detailed Statement of the Factual Basis for the Application”. CoR.0CH1 (eu, 04/12) ¢80Item 7, “Detailed Statement of the Specific Factual Basis for the Application” 1. On December 3, 2014, the accused wrote to Dr. Gary O'Brien, then the Clerk of the Senate, asking that he provide to him a number of documents, including the subject documents. 2. On March 16, 2015, Maxime Faille, lawyer for the Senate, wrote to Donald Bayne, lawyer for the accused, and advised him that the subject documents would not be provided, "as they are subject to the constitutionally-protected law of parliamentary privilege.” 3. The subject documents are referred to a number of times in the statements of Jill Anne Joseph, the author of the subject documents, and Gary O’Brien, the former Clerk of the Senate. 4. On April 27, 2015, the following occurred at the trial of the accused on these charges as Mr. Bayne was questioning the witness Nicole Proulx about a form entitled "Declaration of Primary and Secondary Residences" signed by the accused and filed with the Senate Financial Directorate on May 22, 2013, another copy of which is Exhibit 1, Tab 6 at this trial: Q. ... you can see on the form, it adds, for the first time, and this is after the claims which are before the Court: "For the purpose of the 19th Report of the Senate Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration presented in the Senate on February 28, 2013 [...]" Then it's got a box that says "I agree that the documents provided to the Senate Intemal Audit in the context of the review of primary and secondary residences be forwarded to the Finance and Procurement Directorate or | am providing the following documents: a) a copy of my driver's license.” Not "A." a box for that. Another box: "A copy of my health card.” Another box: "A copy of a relevant page of my income tax form," correct? A. Correct. Q. And now, for the first time, but after the fact of Senator Duffy's questioned designations, do we see a criterion made explicit about providing documents like a driver's license, health card, and/or income tax retum form, correct?A. Correct. Q. And what - in the box above those, | wonder if you could help me? Tell His Honour what the Senate Internal Audit in the context of the review of primary and secondary residences was? A, The Senate Internal Audit - there was - well, as it said, there was a review of primary and secondary residences done by the Senate Internal Audit. Q. Who would that be? vill Anne Joseph? A. Yes Q. Jill Anne Joseph? And would you tell His Honour who Jill Anne Joseph was? A. Atthe time, she was the director of Intemal Audit and Strategic Planning. Q. I'm sorry, | interrupted your answer. You were telling us that Jill Anne Joseph, the internal audit director A. Yes. Q. ... did a report, did she? A. There was a review. I'm just - let me read back: "The Review of Primary and Secondary Residences." That was conducted by the internal audit, so that would have been Jill Anne Joseph. Q. And that report recommended changes? A. | was not part of that report Mr. Holmes: Your Honour A... what hap Mr. Holmes: I'm sorry to rise at this point. | know that there's a lawyer here representing the interests of the Senate, and | wonder if we could take a break for just a moment? | just wanted to clarify something with the lawyer representing the Senate. It involves information that we had received previously about a possible assertion of a parliamentary privilege. It's not our privilege to assert, but | just wanted to confirm with her what the satus of that is. And itl just take five minutesMr. Holmes: ... Ms. London-Weinstein is not a lawyer for the Senate, She's a lawyer for the employees of the Senate; so, Mr. Audcent, Mr. Proulx, Ms. Makhlouf, so far. And with respect to the other issue, I don’t have the same degree of knowledge that my friend, Ms. London- Weinstein has. And if the Court would be agreeable to allowing her to speak on this, perhaps she could outline what the nature of the issue is, although she has a more peripheral involvement in that, as | understand. Ms. London-Weinstein: Good afternoon, Your Honour. ‘The Court: Afternoon. Ms. London-Wienstein: London-Weinstein, initial "A", for the record. And my understanding is that - and as Mr. Holmes correctly stated, | am counsel for some of the Senate employees, | am not counsel for the Senate. They have separate counsel. But | am counsel for vill Anne Joseph, who may or may not be testifying in this matter. The contents of the report, it's my understanding, that there is a claim of privilege that is being asserted by counsel from Gowlings. And | was asked that if the issue arose, that counsel from Gowlings would like to attend and to make submissions on the issue if the report were going to be delved into, even collaterally, through other witnesses. So, | just wanted to relay that to the Court. It's not my area, but there is counsel on board who have spoken to Mr. Bayne about it, and the Crown has been advised as well ‘The Court: All right Ms. London-Weinstein: Thank you, The Court: ... thank you for that information. Mr. Bayne: Your Honour, | don't intend to try and adduce the report. What | intend to do with the witness ~ and my friend is right, when | asked for production of that report from the woman who was the woman charged to do the internal audit and report on the state of these rules, | was told the Senate would not release it, that they're claiming privilege over it. | am not prepared, at this point, to deflect the Court's attention into a discussion of parliamentary privilege and so on and so forth. What | do intend to aks this witness, however, if I'm permitted, is ~ much as was done with the Deloitte Report, KPMG, the Auditor General, it would be shocking to me that this witness would not be familiar with and have a response to whatever it was that Jill Anne Joseph reported, and that therefore it's her response and not the truth of the contents of whatever the report stated, but simply the narrative fact that there was a report and there were changes made afterwards and whether she agreed with the findings of the report, whatever they were. The Court: Yeah, if the questions are put in that general sense, that’s one thing, as long as there's no details being sought. So, that's a very — very general questionMr. Holmes: Okay, but here's the difficulty: the lawyer who acutally wants to assert the privilege isn't here in court right now, and | don't ~ | mean, without knowing more than what Mr. Bayne just said — but to ask about the familiarity with the report and the steps taken in response would have to reveal what the contents of the report actually would be. There's just .. The Court: Well . Mr. Holmes: That's unavoidable. ‘The Court: Well, then that dialogue can be held between that counsel and Mr. Bayne. And perhaps they can come to an agreement or they can argue the point. Mr. Holmes: Okay, but the privilege will be exhausted and blown if Mr. Bayne is permitted to proceed The Court: No, we aren't going to go there right then. Mr. Holmes: Okay. The Court: Right now Mr. Holmes: That's fine. The Court: ... then. We will leave that Mr. Bayne: So, if | understand correctly, | am to leave that area? The Court: Correct. Now, we need our witness. 5, The Supreme Court of Canada, in Canada (House of Commons) v Vaid, 2005 SCC 30, [2005] 1 SCR 667, established the following principles in respect of claims of parliamentary privilege: (a) _ the party who seeks to rely on the immunity provided by parliamentary privilege has the onus of establishing its existence; (b) a court must decide whether the category and scope of the claimed privilege have been authoritatively established; (©) if the existence and scope of a claimed privilege have not been authoritatively established, the court will be required to test the claim against the doctrine of necessity; in order to sustain a claim of privilege, the assembly must show that the sphere of activity for which privilege isclaimed is so closely and directly connected with the fulfillment by the assembly or its members of their functions as a legislative and deliberative body that outside interference would undermine the level of autonomy Tequired to enable the assembly and its members to do their legislative work with dignity and efficiency. 6. _ In his letter of March 16, 2015, the Senate's lawyer did not identify the category of parliamentary privilege upon which his client sought to rely to prevent the production of the subject documents, 7. A process is required in order to allow the Senate to identify the category of parliamentary privilege and, if so advised, to provide the evidentiary and other materials, and factum, to meet the test set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in Vaid to allow the accused and Crown to respond in kind; and to have this Court determine whether there is a valid claim of parliamentary privilege that prevents the subject documents being delivered to the accused.8. INDICATE BELOW OTHER MATERIALS OR EVIDENCE YOU WILL RELY ONIN THE APPLICATION INDIQUEZ CI-DESSOUS D'AUTRES DOCUMENTS OU PREUVES QUE VOUS ALLEZ INVOQUER DANS LA DEMANDE 1 Transcripts cranscpt request detenne be appcaon mst be led wi tis appteton) Transcriptions (Les varscrotens exes pour rear une Gsclon sis demande dover ve cposes eve a domange) Brief statement of legal argument Bref exposé des arguments juridiques BH affidavits) Listbeion) ‘Aigavits(numses cess) Affidavit of Jacob Legault sworn May 2, 2015. 1] Case law or legislation «Rctvan passages shou be indeed on marl, Wel-rown precedent dort nab Be fies. Ony aa tl tefenedto in aunmisson tte Court sou Se fed) Jurisprudence ou lls. (Les passges pruners dover Ste indus arses documents, Le as ben conn ned pee dpots ne ut Séposer ques dozument Qu sean mantons dons ts cose abso bel : 1 Agreed statement of facts Exposé conjoint des fits C1 Oral testimony cist witnesses tobe called st nearing of application) Témoignage oral (Lite des tema ql scoot apse eager 4 aucioce srl demand) BW Other (riease specity Autre Veter pecten Subpoena to Charles Robert dated May 1, 2015 May 3, 2015 Yo: Charles Robert, Clerk of the Senate, as custodian of the documdnts A ‘wales ‘i onder legal repreeoraive/ om de intm6 od dean rapebsenan rue) The Senate, Ottawa, Ontario "(deestxemal or seri Adresse, numéro econo cr acresseectoiaud aux ha de Spnifateny NOTE: Rule 2 requires that the application be served on all opposing parties and on any ther affected parties. NOTA : La régle 2.1 exige que la demande soltsignifige & toutes les parties advorses et aux autres parties concernées. (COR.0C-1 (er. 04/12) 080Court File No. 14-30299 ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEE HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN -and- MICHAEL DUFFY AFFIDAVIT I, JACOB LEGAULT, of the City of Ottawa, in the Province of Ontario, MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS: 1 Iam the student-at-law for Donald Bayne, Counsel for Michael Duffy, and as such have knowledge of the matters hereinafter deposed to. XN Michael Duffy is currently on trial for 31 counts on information 14- 30229 before Justice Vaillancourt in courtroom 33 at the Ottawa Courthouse, 161 Elgin St, Ottawa, ON. 3 It is my understanding that Michael Duffy is bringing a third party records application for production of: bs. The internal report referred to by Jill Anne Joseph in her statement of 2013-09-18 at page 7, line 18 as "my little report", her "draft report on Duffy" and all of its "iterations" referred to on page 10 of the statement; . her "draft report" referred to on page 11, line 28-29, of the same statement; together with |. the "internal audit study" referred to in the statement of Gary O'Brien dated 2013-09-18 at page 7, line 1; . the "full original audit report" referred to on page 35, line 23 of that statement; the report referred to at page 36, line 18 of that statement; and . "Jill Anne's Internal Audit Report or Internal Audit" referred to on page 37 at lines 21-25 of that same statement. Attached to this affidavit, as exhibits, are the following documents: i. Transcript of RCMP interview of Jill Anne Joseph conducted on 2013-09-18 provided as part of Crown disclosure [Exhibit “A”]; ii, Transcript of RCMP interview of Gary O’Brien conducted on 2013- 09-18 provided as part of Crown disclosure [Exhibit “B”]; iii, Excerpt of Proceedings at Trial of Michael Duffy before the aoHonourable Justice Vaillancourt on April 27, 2015 [Exhibit “C”]; iv. Excerpt of Exhibit A, Tab 3 from the Trial: Declaration of Primary and Secondary Residences form for the period April 1*, 2013 to March 31%, 2014 for Michael Duffy [Exhibit “D”]; v. Letter to Gary O’Brien from Michael Duffy dated December 3, 2014 [Exhibit “E”); and Letter to Donald Bayne from Maxime Faille dated March 16, 2015 [Exhibit “F”] vi. 5. 1am advised and believe that the letter to Gary O’Brien from Michael Dufly dated December 3, 2014, Exhibit E, was sent to Gary O’Brien on that date. 6. 1 am advised and believe that the letter to Donald Bayne from Maxime Faille dated March 16, 2015, Exhibit F, was received by Donald Bayne on that date SWORN before me at the City ) of Ottawa, in the East Region, ) # fo ‘A Commissioner, ete.TABA10 6 20 (Pause) JA. JOSEPH: (Long pause) G. HORTON: JA JOSEPH G. HORTON: JL. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J.A JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J.-A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 This is Exhibit . PRESENT: Jil Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 5 Miche! PATRICE ‘sworn before me, th pl. Benoit JOLETTE day of 24, pl Greg HORTON Okay. Allright. (Pause) ‘Kay i's uh, (sighing) September 18°, 2013. Time is 13:20. I'm here with uh, Jil Anne JOSEPH. Do you have ‘ano-, another last name besides JOSEPH? PICKARD JOSEPH, PICKARD JOSEPH? Unshm, That's my logal last name Okay so i's a hyphenated? Yeah Or, or space? Yeah PLCKs ARO. RD, okay. Yeah, Um, Michel PATRICE, Ben JOLETTE and myself. Just for the purpose of stenography when the stenos type, Un-h, ''m gonna have everybody say their name and their uh, occupation. Yes. Just for voice identification. So we'll start with uh, you.2 1s 20 25 30 4J.A. JOSEPH: M, PATRICE: B. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON’ J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G, HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Jill Anne JOSEPH, Arne with an E uh, Director of Internat Audit and Strategic Planning. Michel PATRICE, SENATE Legal Counsel Cpl. Benoit JOLETTE, NATIONAL DIVISION RCMP. ‘And myself Greg HORTON. Um, t-, 80 today as you know we're hhore to interview you relating to uh, Senator DUFFY. Hm. (Clearing throat) And the allegations and investigation into um, fraud slash pub-, um, oteach of trust Un-hm ‘And then uh, uh, subsaquent to that we're looking at an investigation into $90 000 paid back by uh, Nigel WRIGHT on behalf of Senator DUFFY. Okay, Um, but we, well probably ask you some questions relating to BRAZEAU and uh, Senator HARB. as wel Fine, sure, Just because you s-, were cha-, um, Clerk of a committee there That's right. But | wil, mostly we're gonna focus on Senator DUFFY’s uh, situation. Uh, to start maybe ws, if you can just explain your job and ‘what your role is within THE SENATE, how long have you been here, Un-hm ‘What you do and what your day-to-day function is. Okay. Un, Ive been with THE SENATE since January 1989. | um, have worked in committees the um, OFFICE OF THE CLERK as, Executive Assistant. lleft in 94, 95 as Registrar of NAFTA Dispute Settlement. Um, | took a leave of absence from THE SENATE in case | didn't lke it and decided to come back. Uh, continued ‘working in committees, Worked in INTERNATIONAL INTER- PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS uh, when I became a Manager again ont10 15 20 2s 30 38 G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-08-18 ‘as Deputy Principal Cerk, frst of PARLIAMENTARY ASSOCIATIONS and then EXCHANGES. | was asked in 2007 if| would take on the role of Strategic Planning, Manager of Strategic Planning. Took that on um, very happily |, |, | believe that we need to strengthen some of our management practices in THE SENATE. ‘And in 2009, May 2009, THE SENATE um, uh, adopted an internal audit policy and charter. We had been working with um, KPM\sic) no with ERNST AND YOUNG to help us develop an internal audit function and um, it was a sign to the Executive Assistant fo the Clerk of THE SENATE at that time Katherine PEARL-COTE to whom | reported and when she retired in April 2010 uh, well even before she retired inthe fall of twenty, of uh, 2009 the Clerk the current Clerk who had become Clerk in September 2009 asked me if would be interested in taking on aut wth planning and he said, you'll have to get certied and | said, yep that’s fine um, ‘cause my feeling is you never turn down an opportunity fo learn something new. So agreed to that uh, without being fully aware (laughing) of what it was gonna take to actually get certified and everything was ‘a huge effort. Um, and as of April 2010 | was in that job I had ‘already passed the frst of my certification exams and I did complete my certificaton in the summer of 2012. So right now ! have a mixed bag of duties. Um, | take care of aut, planning, policy custody and review. I'm a Clerk atthe table and I se-, | am technically part, this office is technically part of THE CLERK's OFFICE. So | also se-ve in sort of a Senior Advisor role to the Clerk, Um, what else can | tell you with regard to audit uh, it we generally outsource our audits because we have a very small uh, office, very few personnel, and the only audit expertise inthe office technically is myself and | don't, lke audit is a relatively new thing for me, | don't have a long background in audit so we do outsource um, and uh, we've had a number, Pd have to count them up of probably about ten autits since 2009, "Kay. M’kay what, ws, what 'm gonna ask you to do, 'm gonna start at the beginning, we're gonna have you start at the beginning wherever you think the beginning is, Un-h. Somewhere in 2012 preferably um, and just kind of tell me how the DELOITTE external audits came about in.10 20 2s 20 J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G, HORTON: JA, JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A.JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A JOSEPH: 6G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A, JOSEPH: STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Ub-hm Relation to al the Serato. Yeah, Um, uh, the process that went through, what resulted ini from DELOITTE. How it was reported back to THE SENATE rele-, resulting in SENATE uh, reports um, and then kind of how it got referred to us. That's big story. Ikis, its along, Greg, that's gonna take a while. itis. (Laughing) it does take a while, Okay. Un, fm just gonna sit back and liston to you and, Allright, fm not even gonna interrupt. ‘You st, sit back and listen but d+, please stop me if, and I'm, might find myself forgelting details and wanting to backtrack a bit oo, ‘okay? Um, my, okay, my involvement on these files, for me, is lke almost lke a sweater unravelling, right? It's one thing and then ‘another, all this stuff is happening and it sort of started for me, to my recollection in protably September. August, September twenty th-, 2012, when um, there, there was an employee who had writen that uh, Senator WALLIN was fling inappropriate claims and the (Clerk was concerned about that and asked Finance to look at that. Um, to do a review and Khatera AKBARI in Finance who was s-, like an Audit Project Nanager um, who's now on matemity leave, in Finance did a review ef all those claims. A very extensive review, it took her a lot of tme. | guess they had noted an unusual pattem with her already because her travel was going Ottawa Toronto he, she was doing her claims Toronto Ottawa Toronto and then ‘Toronto Saskatoon Toronto. When her travel technically to be10 15 20 2s 30 38 G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: unt ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘SENATE, SEN, ke SENATE home travel, NCR provin-, province travel should have been Ottawa Saskatoon and back. So they did this review and be-, uh, uh, the, the I should also note inh, the, on the public website because none of her, all of her trips were involving Toronto, nothing was falling into the category of regular travel. It was all falling nto other. Um, and so they had noted that | think. | think Senator WALLIN had even spoken to them about it at fone point. ifm giving too many details on files that don't interest you, I'l, I should step. But anyway so they had done all these tum, this claims review and | went over to work with Khatera on that th, and we did a joint memo from myself and uh, Nicole PROULX ‘about the situation for, think probably we sent it to the Clerk and the Clerk was gonna share it or something but anyway um, our take Con it well | had a differant view ofthe, the file than my colleagues in Finance because they felt because it always involved Toronto that everything should be reimbursed and I said, well you're kind of Ignoring the fact that she does eventually get from Ottawa to ‘Saskatoon, Yes she has these stopovers in the middle and probably she should be paying any incremental costs where there's, nol SENATE business involved. So there was a lack of agreement there on, on how, what to do on how to handle the situation and ‘what should be made “epayable. In addition to there being a lack ‘of agreement there um, it had proved to be so time-consuming to do this that Finance, and I certainly don't have the resources, Finance didn't feel they had the resources to do a proper review. So it was decided to contract that to DELOITTE and why DELOITTE? Um, because it was uh, um, itwas a sole-source contract. But we fist started, | first started with ERNST AND YOUNG. No, ha-, why DELOITTE on that? | first started with ERNST AND YOUNG because we have a multiyear contract with them, There's a conflict of inferest. ‘And they had a confic of intorest and then uh, they didn't want to 0 with KPMG because they do our financial statements. | would have gone with them. And then um, uh, what is it? RCGT there GRANT THORNTON(ph) RAYMOND CHABOT GRANT THORNTON, Un-hm20 5 20 2s 30 35 J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A, JOSEPH: ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 | called them and they said, no we don't do this kind of forensic service and so it ended up being DELOITTE. | had this referral | think from uh, ERNST AND YOUNG for DELOITTE, Gary TIMM at DELOITTE and | contacted him and went to see him and he said, you realize that our services are very expensive, You could well fend up spending more uh, for this review than you're ganna get back and I said, yes un, | know that everybody's been wamed uh, this is the, the, the decision. So that whole process took a while While this was happening, getting that contract in place which was. only finally signed off I think January 3 uh, the whole BRAZEAU story broke. You know he doesn't ive there and um, (sighing) somy | don't necessarily rerrember all the details. It's okay, But for some reason itwas being discussed at INTERNAL, ECONOMY and they made, they referred it to @ subcommittee. Well | guess the Clerk knew that was coming and he had talked to ‘me about it and asked me if| would clerk that subcommittee and as | used to be 2 Committee Clerk and because it was kind of in the audit realm | agreed te that. | said, oh yeah for sure I'll do that and | did wear both hats fo" that assignment you know um, at the beginning uh, uh, because It was internal and sort of an internal investigation | was kind of, |was sup-, certainly supporting the um, this special SUBCOMMITTEE ON LIVING ALLOWANCES to look at all the documentaticn available on S-, on Senator BRAZEAU but con the side | was kind of doing a ite auclt as well. So I had collected all his um, declaration of uh, his, his residency declarations, his living allowance claims, his travel claims and | knew what his pattems were but then I said to um, the Chair that We could validate his whereabouts. | could | work on validating his \Whereabouts by looking at cell phone records and she said, yeah doit. And so then I did up the calendars and it showed that, it didn't align. Hk, he wesn't, he wasn't in Maniwaki when you would have expected him to be in Maniwaki in accordance with his claims, okay? So I presented that to the subcommittee um, his Lawyer came before you were there forall that. His Lawyer came uh, and did an-, and did most of the talking | recall. And was very good in terms of pointing out the holes in the controt framework around residency. You know saying well tha-, tha, that's not written down, anywhere it doesn't say how often he has to go home and things10 35 20 25 30 35 40 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 like that. So um, then the news broke about HARB, this was also referred to the subcommittee at the same time INTERNAL ECONOMY uh, asked oF, re-, oF ordered the administration to do an internal audit um, but they'd it wasn't an au-, 2 real audit because they determined how they wanted it done. They said, youre gonna ‘ask for these four pieces of information, the four indicators. That was requested ofall Senators. They signed off on the letter. | collected all the information and compiled itfor them. Um, the list was confidential. Um, and |, | sort of challenged them and said, | hha, also have to look at char, travel patterns because I'm not yet Uh, 'm not like @ regular Aucitor in this place that I'm given access to.all the documentation. | have to, you know make the case to get access to anything, Sot, itwas uh, a meeting with the, with STEERING AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE, a-, it was AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE at tre time, you know its different members now ‘and made the case for looking at travel patterns. So | was able to Took at 64 point travel reports and where | saw problems look at more claims. So I did up my litle report but they didn't ike it because, | argued that there was a lack of clear criteria surrounding residency and they sad, no, no, no, its very clear. Primary residence they're supposed to live there. So to, | stil maintain, yes primary residence is clear but when it comes to the policy instrument surrounding that providing guidelines or criteria for how that's to be met that was not very clear. That was not well Understood. fit had been well understood Finance wouldn't have been processing those claims, because Finance is very good at checking you know uh, a, at following policy, at recording the transactions, making sure that everything is property recelpted. ‘The OAG found that F nance does a great job and if there had been clear provisions in the policy that you have to live there 50% of the time or you have to do this or that they would have requested it Furthermore since then the, the INTERNAL ECONOMY themselves have acknowledged that there was a gap there. Ithey hadn't have required that four indicators now be provided which they now have to do when they, or three indicators have to be provided now when they submit their, theiruh, declarations of residency. Um, tha-, that was, that was proof that there wasn't enough surrounding that ‘cause they're now requiring more information than they used to Anyway so that didn't, my, my litle arguments didn't go very far on that. Um, so we're at HARB, | guess then there had been stories10 20 2 38 6. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH! G. HORTON: J.A.JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 about where Senator DUFFY lived even at his time of appointment and that resurfaced. Jm, | think December, January and oh yes | should say that um, on BRAZEAU and HARB when | had this, information about Senator BRAZEAU and brought it back to the committee they didn't realy know what to do with it either and neither did |. Itwas like hm, we've got something here you know and we're not sure what fo do. And it certainly wasn't done to any standard that could be used in, in court or anything like that. This is THE STANDING COMMITTEE or THE STEERING. COMMITTEE? ‘This is THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON LIVING ALLOWANCE. So Se- this was Senator MARSHALL. (Okay THE MARSHALL COMMITTEE. yes. Okay. Senator CAMPBELL and Senator COMEAU,. COMEAU, okay. ‘And | brought these results back to them and the feeling was yeah ‘we need to send that out for, for further investigation or further confirmation on what io do. And since we already had the f-, the WALLIN files with DELOITTE we said, okay we'll do another, contract with DELOITTE because they already s-, understand the ‘context of our travel palicies and everything else. So we did this contract on BRAZEAU and HARB. | think the two contracts might have been signed even around the same date if not on the samme date, because we had finally sorted out WALLIN's situation, signed ‘a contract for her and BRAZEAU and HARB. So that was under way, | provided everything | had to them and the DUFFY story was. ‘coming up and that pert on me, to my recollection is a bit fuzzy but | remember t-, Uh, uh, ilwas Senator MARSHALL saying to me, oh we're gonna get DUFFY, | don't want to get DUFFY too, we have ‘enough on our plate. She didn't want to take on DUFFY, THE ‘STEERING COMMITEE was handling DUFFY and STEERING COMMITTEE said, yes we'll go ahead and amend the BRAZEAU HARB contract because they're exacly ike, DUFFY’s situation was cexaclly ike BRAZEAL and HARB it was a review of thelr, you ae10 6 20 6 30 35 G. HORTON: J. A JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 know, where is their primary residency and have they been making appropriate claims? So that was a, the contract was amended to ‘add DUFFY on. The objectives of the contract were for them to look at our policy frarrework, determine whether or not these claims: were appropriate andto the best oftheir ability determine where the ‘Senator's primary residence was. Okay? Keeping in mind that to my mind primary resicence was stil a bt of a nebulous thing. But primary does mean something, right? Then um, we had, oh gosh, | can't remember, it would have been the same day | guess April 164, that um, | think itwas THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON LIVING ALLOWANCE in the noming uh, that Gary TIMM, Alan STEWART, Guillaume VADEBONCOEUR came in in the morning reported back their findings on BRAZEAU and HARB and in the afternoon, they did DUFFY and a progress report on WALLIN. Boy that's fuzzy. So um, then they were finalizing their reports and the three reports ah, on WALLIN they were asked to continue their investigation because they had found enough, they had looked at the same two year window for everybody, right? Starting April 1%, 2011 and on WALLIN they were asked to continue back to the time ‘of her appointment, So um, then they were finalizing their reports | don't ¢-,'m, 'm not really clear when we got the reports and | think | only got them at the last minute, 1 don't think I even saw the translation. [ put them directly in touch with translation. The only, the only report that | got in advance um, was the WALLIN report Um, I the, the WALLIN report in August was the only one that I received in advance of anybody else and | was actually the only ‘one that received it. No one else in THE SENATE saw it, Um, and | went through you know did the, the negotiation or whatever the, the uh, administration with uh, translation to get everything ready for the August 12" tatling ‘Okay Il help you with the date on the other ones it's (clearing throat) April 29" you received the, Okay thank you. ‘The uh, DELOITTE, the uh, DUFFY, BRAZEAU and HARB. ‘Okay and uh, and | den't know what happened after that. There must have been a cotple of meetings to discuss draft reports. Uh, ‘when | got the report, |, | had listened enough at this point to what they wanted to do on ‘his. Uh, and, and basically their number one2 15 20 30 G. HORTON! J.A. JOSEPH @ HORTON: JA. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH 6. HORTON: J. A, JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH’ 10 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 18 DATE: 2013-09-18 argument was, primary means something. They should have known better and theyre gonna have to pay back. So that was kind of the tack that the reports took. |, | regurgitated the facts as DELOITTE had found them. | put in some extra arguments um, in accordance with what had been hearing from the committee, committees, subcommittees and basically did up, frst did up a Joint report for BRAZEAU and HARB. Senator MARSHALL saw it ‘and she said, no, | want them separate. So | separated the two out but they said a lot of the same thing ! just had to kind of change the circumstances for eacr of them. And uh, then closer to the date, a litle bit tater, a few days later | had to do a similar exercise for ‘Senator DUFFY and dd a, a draft report on DUFFY and provided that to the Clerk and then it went through you know its iterations. through THE STEERING COMMITTEE and THE FULL COMMITTEE and then it was tabled and here we have the reports. ‘So have | missed something? | don't know. No i's a good star. Kay. Um, uh, fm gonna goto right to where yout a. Okay, So you received the DELOITTE report um. Yeah, Based on everything I know it's April 28" ish, Yes. ‘That's when, Yes. twas tabled to THE SENATE. Um, and | know that the draft was, was tabled to THE SUBCOMMITTEE on May 7". So, Okay. Between April 20" anc May 7” um, what process did you go ‘through to create a uh, my understanding is from the Clerk that you created the draft report? That's right.10 15 2s 30 35 G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: 6. HORTON JA. JOSEPH 6. HORTON J.A. JOSEPH @. HORTON J. A. JOSEPH: " STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 14 DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘And that um, so based on the reading of the DELOITTE and whose verbal information and written information do you create r- a, an Initial report? Uh, well! (sighing) have been privy to all the meetings thet, and all the discussions to my knowiedge that have taken place in committees, uh, regarding al of these reports. ‘So that includes both sommittees THE MARSHALL COMMITTEE, Both committees. 'm the only one whose been there forall of them, So you're ta, talking STANDING, STEERING, Yeah. ‘And, and THE MARSHALL COMMITTEE? Yes. Okay. Allofthem. So um, on the sub-, THE MARSHALL COMMITTEE ‘um, I can fall you that when they got the results there was some level of discomfort uh, about what to do with i Un, but Senator MARSHALL we have ‘0 respect the fact that she had ten years experience as Auditor General of Newfoundland and something did ‘not smell right to her and she said, no, this, they shouldn't have been charging this. They should have known and she was quite ‘adamant about it and um, and they agreed and uh, and again it came down to that primary meaning something and whatever. So ‘when the report finally came in um, and I had something to work with, [then cobbled together and it was uh, uh, at home actually on my laptop one evening, because | like to work in the quiet of, of my, ‘my personal space right and |, | uh, had read the DELOITTE report land | knew where they were coming from and | put this draft report together for thei consideration. THE MARSHALL SUBCOMMITTEE went paragraph by paragraph through the report. She had seen It n advance and had offered some revisions, Maybe you've seen those in emails um, then uh, they went paragraph by paragraph and made to my recollection very few ‘minimal changes to the report. | had shown the draft fo Michel and the Clerk in advance ef taking it to committee and uh, Michel made ‘some good additions on the wording of the primary residence and10 20 2s 30 35 G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON’ 4J.A. JOSEPH: G, HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH. 2 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 45 DATE: 2013-09-18 that kind of thing. Soum, and that was a process of, | don't know, Jet's say a week, I'm cuessing and um, and then a similar thing, a fow days later | had to start on the DUFFY report. | already had BRAZEAU and HARE as separate reports. Again | took that report land changed the circumstances to suit Senator DUFFY's situation and again its based cn what's in DELOITTE's report and what | ha- + had been hearing around the table of uh, THE AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE, Senator's n-, never write these things themselves. They uh they always have Library Analysts writing reports whether it be special studies or observations on bills or this kind of thing, t's done for them. But i's based on what we're hearing, right? What the, what their opinion is and when they see it they may have minimal or substantive changes depending on, on th, how well you've captured uh, their thoughts on it. With Senator DUFFY um, provided that to the Clerk and | think also to you Michel ‘and | think the Clerk ran it past Senator TKACHUK um, because I recall an email from Robin HAY about the report asking for and | conly know this ‘cause | put the reports together for you on CD. Um, 0, | had to go through that and fit, itum, it you know made an imp-, impression on me how the process had gone. Um, Senator TKACHUK requested information on how long we had been using this uh, declaration of primary residence form so there was exchanges back and forth with Finance. | thought it was 1999 they, they and Lucie LAVOIE were able to confirm it was 1998 that went into the report and then it went to committee. I'm talking about the uh, THE STEERING slash AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE at that point, ‘And was present for that meeting and for the meeting that aftemoon with THE FULL COMMITTEE and the next morning with ‘THE FULL COMMITTEE, "Kay. So, based on everything | know to date it went to the committee ul, the first date is May 7" Kay. Um, would they have received an advance update TKACHUK would have received en advance copy, Yes, ‘And you guys had discussions around what you just told us. Yes.20 2 2» G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH. G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: 13 16 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Um, would George FUREY and Carolyn STEWART OLSEN have received an advance copy? 1'm, 'm really guessing on this. | don't think so. Um, generally because um, that they're one and the same with STEERING COMMITTEE, Lucie LAVOIE has been the one to provide their documents to them. | provide things to THE CLERK'S OFFICE for that subcommittee and uh, they were providing documents in advance. They may Fave just been circulated at the meeting. | ‘think just at the meeting frankly | think the Chair might have been the only one who had seen itn advance and | think that's true with ‘THE MARSHALL SUBCOMMITTEE as well that she had, was the ‘only one who had seen itn advance and then they, they looked at ital together in committee. ‘Okay. So the May 7" meeting would you have attended that? Yes | was there. ‘And do you know who have been there besides you? ‘Um, can you just remind me was that a Monday? Tuesday. Tuesday? Tuesday yes. (Okay £0 fr, the nthe 0" was when it was tabled in THE SENATE, Yes ‘And that was uh, Thursday. ‘A Thursday. May 7, Tuesday. Who's normally around the table? Um, ‘cause thelr meetings, when they’ sitting there are meetings just about every Tuesday afteroon,. Hm. Of STEERING AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE. So uh, uh, it they don’t always meet as AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE but when there's audit business they change hats and do audit stuf. Um, it would have bbeen the Clerk Lucie LAVOIE, | think possibly Jimmy MANNIIGA20 20 25 30 G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: ‘J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON’ 14 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘coming in and out, myself, | don't think Nicole PROULX stayed for that portion of the discussion. | wouldn't think so. think that when they get on to these audit matters they lke a faily empty room. I'm sorry, Michel, | don't remember if you were there. | really don't but uh, Which Senators were there? {'m gonna guess that, let me think I'm gonna guess that you were and | am guessing sowha: | don't know, ‘And the three, and the three Senators were there? The 3 Senators, of course, yes. Now do you recall at all what happened at that committee? What was discussed? 1 do have a good recollection, Okay, OF that committes. Lay it on me: Okay, 80, because we're discussing my repor, right? Right Um, we went paragraph by paragraph pretty much and Senator STEWART OLSEN wanted s-, a p-, some part to come out, & portion of a paragraph to come out and Senator FUREY sai well let's take it out frem here to here and | said, no S-, Senators that doesn't make any sense because if you remove all that reference to the deciaration then you can no longer say this ‘wording is clear. | said, are you, if you don't have anything that, if you're not citing anything you can't say that the wording is clear. So they left some extra wording in there but a part of the report, & fairly important part ofthe report | think came out and | th-, I don't recell whether or not tere was discussion of uh, | think at some: point | must have heard a comment around the fact that Senator DUFFY had repaid sohis situation was a bit different, But | could bbe imagining that because we heard 50 much after the fact. “Kay.10 15 20 30 J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: 18 is STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Yeah ‘And then go after that the meeting ends do you remember if that was a daytime, aftemoon, evening meeting? ‘That was afternoon ard uh, yeah it must, it must have been ‘afternoon. (Inaudible) generally they take place at around 3 o'clock. “Kay. (Clearing throat) 3:30. Um, s0 after that do you ih, was there any meetings held that right, any informal mestings, any, approached by anybody to discuss the report? So that's Tuesday, right? Yes ‘And no, it had to have been earlier because | think that same night we had a meeting of the uh, it had to have been earlier because that same night THE FULL COMMITTEE met, No? Yes? (Talking at the same time) M. PATRICE: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON’ J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: ((naudibie) on the Tuesday. We're on the Tuesday? Oh yeah, okay, so Wednesday night THE FULL COMMITTEE mot and then Thursday moming they met again and Thursday aiterioon i's reported in the Chamber. Okay. Um, what was your question again? (Levghing) (Laughing) So after the Tuesday meeting, Yes The intial meeting where they frst read your report and go. Yeah. Okay we want these changes um, was there, were you approached ‘or was there any informal meatings after that where, did anybody come to you,6 20 2s J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON’ J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEP 16 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 49 DATE: 2013-09-18 “ No. To your offee? Did you No Get hailed to an office to discuss this? No, not at all “Kay. Do you know ifthe other th. ifthe three Senators involved had um, fan, a non-committee meeting regarding the, the draft report? | don't know. So y+, you wouldn't have attended another meeting wh, regarding, No. ‘This? Okay, Okay. So jump into May 8" now. Yes. So that’s the Wednestay. Yes. ‘There was a meeting held that day. Earlier in the day believe (inaudibie) ‘Okay so when exactly dd this report get dealt with? Maybe not on the Tuesday. M-, may-, maybe it was on the Wednesday. It got deait with on the Tuesday Okay. (Inaudible) at a meeting Right (Inaudible) ‘So what did they discuss on Wednesday? That's my question to you (Laughing)10 6 20 2% G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: ‘J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4. A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: 4J.A, JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J.A, JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH. G.HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J. JOSEPH G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH G, HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: 7 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH a 2 DATE: 2013-09-48 (Laughing) You were at the meeting, you tell me. (Laughing) (Laughing) Oh wh, what ime of day, sony? Hihhelp you out Uh, here I am interviewing you, (inaudible) Instead From what we've, we've leamed through the investigation and other statements is that around 2 o'clock on the 8” there was a meeting regarding un, draft reports, Senator, An. MARSHALL.. ‘Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah. Weil the things I'm telling you for the Tuesday | think they happened on Wednesday. | think they id too. Yeah, (Laughing) ‘Yeah. Somy. What heppened on Tuesday? (Laughing) | don't know. (Laughing) | don't know. | don't know. Um, uh, b, | think I would have to access notes from the Committee Secretary to see, ‘That's Lucie? To be honest with you. That's Lucie, yeah “Kay. Um, maybe this may help you out a litle bit for the Wednesday, Okay. Well forget about Tuesday for now. ‘So Wednesday I've got it.10 2 G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: G, HORTON: 8. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: J.A.JOSEPH: 8, JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: M, PATRICE: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: M. PATRICE: J. A. JOSEPH: M, PATRICE: 18 2 bes ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Wednesday is af, is 84, is 2 o'clock PM meeting. ‘Yeah and that's where this was done and at § o'clock they sat down as a committee to look at the report Correct Yeah Which ws, (inaudible) Which report, al thre? ‘No uh, the DUFFY. ‘The DUFFY one? DUFFY onl, uh, wait,no it would have been all three. Yes DUFFY, BRAZEAU and HARB yes. ‘Were they all deat wity at tha-, at that time? Yes, they, no, | think itwas the next moming. Uh, hold on, oh guys, | eel really dumb. Ur, okay um, n-, ne, next morn, lat me think, DUFFY showed up with his Lawyer the next morning. HARB was dealt with that evening for sure. He was there with his lawyer. BRAZEAU didn't show up. Michel's not helping me. Um, (laughing), He's, he’s, he's sat through one too many of these already. (Laughing) (Laughing) Ths isnt funny. But you're doing good. Okay. ‘So HARB was there wth his lawyer. DUFFY (inaudible) BRAZEAU. didn't show up. No, Was uh, Senator DUFFY present? ‘That evening? | think ne was, With or without Counsel?10 6 2» 2s J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J. A, JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A.JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 8. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: 19 2 ~w ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18, Without Counsel. Showed up again next day with. Okay so was uh, we, what was resolved that night then? All three, one... No they,. Of them, two of them? Discussed them but | don't think that they finalised anything and like they discussed the situations around the reports but they didn't finalise anything. | thitk the actual consideration of the reports and ‘what they did with the reports was all the next morning. So, next. (naudibie) M Let me justinterrupt you a ite bit Yeah. ‘iff anybody wanted to change, Up-hm, (Okay let's say you table a report and I go, okay | want paragraphs three and four taken out, is it you that takes that back and, and makes that change? Iewas me, yeah Okay. (Inavabey Itwas me uh, during, Ike wh, wh, here's the thing, from the ‘committe, the subcommittee since I had dane the reports | came back to my office, mace the changes and provided them to Lucie LAVOIE from there, right? And when THE FULL COMMITTEE because | think I may have even been siting at the table as kind of the Advisor or the, the Staff Person who had worked on this when it was being discussed in committee, Um, that | had taken notes on ‘some of the changes that needed to be made and then went back to the Clerk's office afior the meeting to make sure that Lucie had captured everything properly. And keep in mind right now, part of my fogginess is because | just went through the whole thing again ‘on WALLIN, right? In August so that's what's fresher in my mind,0 6 G, HORTON: 4J.A, JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JL. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: @. HORTON: J. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J. JOSEPH G. HORTON: 20 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 But on the two subcommittees, yeah I, once | had, ff, for MARSHALL, for MARSHALL’ subcommittee reports | finalised them coming out of cemmittes, had her sign them in accordance with the minutes and as | said there had been very few changes. When | came out of THE STEERING COMMITTEE | finalized it, sent itto Lucie and it was kind of out my hands, right? So, (Okay so do you remember the changes that had to be made um, at ‘ny time over the May, my understanding is few changes were ‘made on the first day, May 7, there might¥ve been like a change or ‘wo that's what, what fm told, May 8" there was drastic changes made where stuff was taken out | can't even remember Greg ifthe reports were given to them on that day. don't, | don't remember when they got them. Okay. But! | know the Chair had seen them in advance. But when | remember them really dealing with t was just a few hours before that § o'elock meeting Okay ‘That was kind ofthe frst time they really eat down, ‘And that was, ‘And chewed on ityou know, In com, in committee? ‘Yeah that was in THE SUBCOMMITTEE, And, ‘And that was the meeting | was trying to remember who everyone was, who, who was allthere and maybe Michel was there and he wasn't but | think it was a fairly closed group. That's the 2 PM meeting Yeah, So that's what | really want tof, I want te focus on the 2 PM. Ub-hm, ‘And the 5 PM er, 5:30 meeting,20 25 20 JA. JOSEPH 6. HORTON: JA, JOSEPH 6G. HORTON: JA, JOSEPH 6G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 21 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 24 DATE: 2013-09-18 Onay Um, changes are proposed | guess at the 2 PM meeting? Yes. Whe prop-, proposed those and, and wha, wha, what Senator, Was the conversation 'STEWART-OLSEN... ‘That happened in there? Senator STEWART-OLSEN oh gosh I know it was some ofthe arguments she made um, uh, (sighing) (pause) they didn tke that DELOITTE had found thatthe policies weren't clear. They didnt Ike that, they acknowledged it but they didnt want to | tink | had already put the wording as acknowledged because of things that thoy had said to me. |would have to look atthe report to be honest with you. Itmightlog ny memory if looked at he versions ofthe report to 860 wha-, to remember why she argued fr something to come out. Um, but there was 8 paragraph as | said paragraph that she wanted out and then Senator FUREY was open to that as you know the opposition member in there, Both said, no lets take it cout only to here and then | sai, no you can't take out al that. ‘That's my recollection so there was a chunk that came out um, and... "Kay £0, s0 do you goback to your office and physically delete that from a, an electronic copy, Is that how that works out? Yes. So'm writing or the report while Tm in there and then ! come bback to my office and | sit down and I take it out Kay. ‘And then | sent iton te Lucie and sald, here's what they adopted. ‘So you're the only person that would ma-, would have made er, revisions, corrections, deletions, additions to the report? No because there could have been more after. Okay.10 15 2» 2 J. A JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH, G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: 22 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH a DATE: 2013-09-18, aut, After what? Up, after did my job. Okay. Okay, ‘After | passed the report on. So up to that point the report from the time it was first drafted to the time | sent to Lucie LAVOIE it was, in my possession for that perio. Okay. So, That's, doesn't mean cther people didn't see i. But what, 80, | continue, what | considered to be the true version ofthe report was in my possession, (Okay so after you make your change you electronically sent Itto Lucie? Yeah. Um, so if um, Gary O'BRIEN, i i the Senators had come to him and said, okay w-, we want this change made, could he have made that change? twas physically in ther possession, yeah. Yeah. (Okay so any changes ‘hat were made after it lefl your office at between 2 and 5:30, Yeah Were uh, Were made in that off. That was, y- you made, Yeah. Your changes after the 2 o'clock meeting? Yeah.20 20 2s G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH. G, HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH, G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON’ 4.A. JOSEPH. 23 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 26 DATE: 2013-00-18, And sentit,. 3:20, Offto Lucie | sentit to Lucie 3207 Yeah Okay. Or around then So any changes that vere made between 3:30 and 5:30 were made by somebody else? Yeah. Um, okay that makes sense, Then at 5:30 PM there's a meeting, |'m gonna help you out a litte bit wth some of (inaudible). No, | think was itwas 5, no? Uh, itmight have beer 5, yeah, Okay. 5,5:30 okay. Okay, W., either one, Doesn't matter. Um, there's a meeting that's held and they deal with BRAZEAU and HARB but DUFFY gets put overt the next moming uh, Un-hm. ‘Apparently. You attend that meeting the next morning. | think that's THE STANDING COMMITTEE meeting. Yes, that's right. That's the entire c. Yeah.8 25 30 35 G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 24 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Fifteen (15) person ccmmittee. Do you remember what happens ‘on there, that meeting? ‘Yeah uh, Senator MARSHALL reported frst. Her two reports went through well she, she made her re-, reports and they went through without revision. And then the, well frst of all| should say DELOITTE was at the meeting to start. They continued answering ‘more questions. Senator DUFFY was there with his lawyor I think he got up and left before the reports were actually considered. The BRAZEAU and HARB reports were adopted, no revisions and then they started talking about the DUFFY report and there were, there ‘were motions uh, Senator STEWART OLSEN again wanted more deletions from the report. It, the report to my mind was becoming very scant. There ws, there was very litle in there fo, to justify the acceptance of a repayment which had, ha-, which had already been made. Because the, the, the conclusion and recom., in the Conclusions and recomendations it said, you know we, we feel that this money was rightly repald, was properly reimbursed. Sof you're gonna do the, gut that kind of ar-, conclusion down | feel you need some context around it, So I | think | was alittle bit concerned about things coming out. | have @ close relationship with Senator MARSHALL | said, uh, | said something about th-, you know because they, | think they, they broke, they had a litle uh, ‘caucus or something I think they had a litle break in, in thai, in their committee mesting and I, | at some point had an opportunity to ‘say to Senator MARSHALL um, they're taking a fo-, or the, you know, this repor is, isi, s becoming very short or something like that and she said, well they're not doing thal to my reports, (Laughing) And uh, and then they came back and they finalized What they wanted and and that's what it was. So there were actually, there was actually text removed from the report. At THE ‘SUBCOMMITTEE an¢ at THE FULL COMMITTEE and there was a version in between as wel that you have, 've provided. ‘Aversion in between? In between both meetings. Between your meeting, Yeah An, and, an-, and with more revisions made.20 2s J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A JOSEPH @. HORTON: J.A.JOSEPH 6. HORTON JA JOSEPH . HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH @. HORTON: (Pause) B. JOLETTE: J. A, JOSEPH: 8, JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH B, JOLETTE: JA, JOSEPH B, JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: 25 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH a8 DATE: 2013-09-18 Yeah, (Okay. So that'd be the ones that were made, the revisions between fifteen thit-, 330 PM on the Tuesday and, Yeah, ‘The next morning? Yeah uh, no, or, ‘The afternoon meeting. Un, 5 o'clock meeting 5:30. Yeah 5, 5:30, 5:80 (inaudible) okay. (Pause) Um, (sighing) Ben? | have some specific questions but | just want to go back on. ‘something you said earlier about Senator BRAZEAU when all this started, Une, ‘And um, you were looking at expense claims, Ub-hm, ‘Travel claims and cell phone records Uns. ‘And you say it earlier in your statement that it appeared he wasn't where he was claiming to be? Uh-hm, Um, could you just go, first of all what do you think about that? And just, Uh-hm, Go more into detail in what you meant by that. (Okay um, first of all when the DELOITTE reports came back, consider you know we've contracted to DELOITTE to, to look at this10 20 25 20 35 8. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH, 8, JOLETTE: J.-A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: 8, JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH. D> 26 STATEMENT OF JI Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 2 DATE: 2019-08-18 stuff we found and we get reports baok from DELOITTE saying, they didn't claim any more trips home than they were entitled to, ‘And we think they owe 200 bucks because they claimed SENATE business on a weekend and you know they were working in their office and are they entitled? The, so there was a question, are they entitled to do that? And Iwas honestly disappointed in the DELOITTE reports. expected more. I, was under this naive Impression that when you file an expense claim it reflects what you were actually doing (laughing) so, | was surprised that um, that the claims did not align wth the actual whereabouts. Whereabouts was the word | used in the first draft of my report. They didnt ike that word they changed ito location. Um, but |, | would have thought that those things would align and they didn't so, that's what I meant. (Pause) Butin the end I guess it can be argued that and this is what his lawyer said, he, he didnt, he wasn't charging extra trips home. He was charging when THE SENATE adjoumed and ‘you know he knew that okay THE SENATE’s adjourned, I'm entitled to-go home. | may have to come back on the weekend to take care ‘of my kids in Gatineau or whatever but you know I'm entitled to - uh, you were the c-, um, you would assist the majority or all the ‘meetings for STEERING,, Un-him. ‘And internal, are you aware of.20 2% 30 J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: A JOSEPH B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: 4J.A, JOSEPH: @. JOLETTE: JA, JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH 8. JOLETTE: J.A JOSEPH 8. JOLETTE: J. JOSEPH 8, JOLETTE: J. A JOSEPH 8, JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH B. JOLETTE: nM STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Not all, not all STEERING. Not all STEERING? Okay. No | would attend STEERING, | used to attend all of STEERING but that stopped about a year ago. Okay. ‘And um, | would go to AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE matters. Okay. ‘And then other STEERING COMMITTEE matters that were relevant to my work. ‘Ate you aware of the uh, the three Senators in question uh, uh, ‘STEWART OLSEN, TKACHUK and uh, FUREY um, having meetings um, uh, specifically the CONSERVATIVE Senators having, having meetings with the uh, people from the PMO and discussing the uh, the drafts of uh, the reports you were prepared, No. Did anybody, Northing Did anybody from PMO, and Greg was asking you that atthe start if ‘anybody gave you a prone call or came and saw you. Did anybody ‘rom PMO call you, Nothing. (Or ask you about, Nothing Um, what was uh, writen what was detailed in the reports? No, no, no Okay. Nothing at all um, | mean uh, uh, fst of all wh, 'm net poltically connected Un-hn10 20 25 J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A.JOSEPH. 8. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH, 32 eo ey ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘And even if} were in any way uh, | think people know me well ‘enough that they wouldn't have included me in anything ike that. But when the story broke | couldn't believe it. That was as big a surprise to me as to anyr, Which, ‘Anybody on the stree Which, which story? (Laughing) ‘The DUFFY story Okay, The DUFFY story, yeah. (inaudible) was shocked. ‘The, you mean the 90 000 or, Ye Yeah ‘You mentioned earlier that you um, were close to Senator MARSHALL and, Yeah, I believe you, youve teen working with her um, Since this... The, the BRAZEAU uh, Since December on THE SUBCOMMITTEE stuf Okay. If, if Senator MARSHALL would have attended one of these um, caucus meetings with uh, the PMO, Yeah. Would you have been aware ofthat? Or? No, No? Um, 1, have an amail here. Un-h.10 1 20 2s B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 33 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 201340-18 36 {only have one. Un-hm, Its la, labelle, (Unknown person laughing) B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A.JOSEPH. B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: (Laughing) You only get one, some of had many, Okay. Um, (laughing) Fis 14:17. Ym gonna read it and et you see it Okay. I's 14:17 Ive labelled it document number 1. t's an email chain uh, dated April 20" to23", 2013. Uh-hm, ‘And uh, it's it starts on the 20" ends on the 23° and it's communications from DELOITTE,.. Uh-hm, To yourself and the fist email is addressed to y-, you from Gary TIMM and Guillaume wh, VADEBONCOEUR is uh, carbon copied. Um, Okay. Viljust read it out to yeu. (Laughing) It says, good aftemoon Jil Anne I received an email this morning ‘rom Counsel for Senator D, wherein Counsel provided a copy of the letter dated April 18" from Senator DUFFY to Senator TKACHUK, Yes. Re-, regarding an informal conversation and is regarding um, DUFFY states uh, should |, sh-, uh, if you want I'l gladly cooperate and uh, and uh, meet with your committes or subcommittee or auditors from DELOITTE to respond to questions fF questions about my redisidency(sic) in PEI. And Gary TIMM, ‘asks you, we'd like to meet with him ub, could you make it happen18 20 30 J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 4. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH’ B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: JA JOSEPH: 34 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Whatever it might delay the reports but whatever and uh, you would answer, yes okay uh, Ill consult the Clerk of THE SENATE Gary O'BRIEN who in turn wil consult with the Chair of INTERNAL, ECONOMY Senator David TKACHUK in this matter. | agree that a ‘meeting and the provision of requested documentation wil further assist your review of Senator DUFFY's claim and will provide more consistency with the cther Senators under review. Yeah, because all of them had been interviewed except for Senator DUFFY. Exactly and so um, Gary O'BRIEN respon-, or sends an email to ‘Senator TKACHUK raring, regarding this and states, hi Senator as per DELOITTE's emai to vill Anne do you advise or encourage that ‘Senator DUFFY mestwith DELOITTE and provide the documentation requested? Yeah, Um, my question to ycu, are you aware if Senator DUFFY was, advised of the request from DELOITTE to speak with them and uh. Yes. Or, he, that he would have been? ‘Yes my recollection is that he was advised W., and were you, like do have a role in that? Like were you the ‘Are you saying was he advised In advance of 1'm talking, Of the, About the, First emai? No, ike mm talking about here in, in April 20" or the 23". If, if, The, He was advised? The second opportunity,10 6 20 2s 20 B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 4. A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: 6, HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anno PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Yes. To meet wth him? Ub-hm. With them? Uh, um, fo be honest 'm not sure because I thi, uh, | What I do recalls Serator saying, no it's too late. We want this report done. Okay. ‘And s0 was he told again that he had an opportunity? Yeah | th think he was. | think he was given like do it, a doit now kind of thing and (sighing) | don't really remember. But |, know that there was urgency so if, if, Iremember them saying, if he meets and its ‘gonna delay the report, So there was a more urgency to get the, “The repor The report complete, Would acom to be, the, the emphasis was on the, the report ‘meeting this deadline not on accommodating, | think the feeling had been he was given plenty of opportunity ‘So meeting the (inaudible). He never cooperated you know this, this story of okay well then he stopped cooperating winen he, when the 90 000 was repaid. To my mind he never cooperated. He never cooperated with the,.. Was he encouraged to cooperate? th, | remember Gary TIMM Well the opportuities were given d:, Uh, telling me he kept being in touch with uh, Janice PAYNE and with, you know and um, ne nothing was happening, nothing was forthcoming. | provided to DUFFY the briefing book that I had prepared for DELOITTE on his file similar to uh, what | had done for ‘every other and uh, no there was never any meeting, never any provision of documents. DELOITTE did thelr assessment only on what THE SENATE was able to give them. So this was an extemal audit, independent audit, Yeah. 3810 6 20 25 G. HORTON: JA, JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.B. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A.JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: 36 C ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 39 DATE: 2013-09-18, Conducted by DELOITTE. Um, BRAZEAU we know c-, cooperated, Yes. For the most part wth, Yes. Un, that uh, as did HARS, Yeah, yes. If Senator DUFFY was advised or directed not to cooperate by THE PRIME MINISTER’s OFFICE, Un-hm. Would that be in direct, in your opinion, direct confit of what THE ‘SENATE was trying te accomplish with an external independent audit? Uh, has, i, (1 were tell you uh, |, okay, THE PMO interfered end said, DUFFY don't cooperate ws wou, \Whe-, what do you think about that? | would have thought they had no business doing that. No because,, |'m not saying they dic that. No, no. ! just saying (inaudible, | would have thought i; if that had been the case | would have thought that they really don’t have any business doing that. 1 quess, | guess everybody | mean when, when something ike that is, going on do you have an obligation to cooperate? | would suppose that you do, | don't know. Id, I don't know the right answer on that. | think uh, maybe i's a personal call for each individual depending on the situation. Do you know the date that the auait for Senator DUFFY was concluded by DELOITE?10 20 2s 20 (Pause) J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J.A, JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A.JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: a7 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 |, you're getting me ino the area of, of uh, the repayment and or ‘something lke that's because what | remember is, | think sometime in March there might have been a repayment and the expectation that DELOITTE would cease to look at anything, Un-hm, Relating to Senator DUFFY's files. However the email thet | just read was dated April 20” and it's stil, Gary TIMM sti, Yeah ‘Asking to see if DUFFY, ‘Cause | haven't finished... Wan, wants to, (inaudible) sorry go ahead. So there was ane, (Laughing) (Laughing) (Inaudible) ‘cause uh, there was an expectation that things might have concluded with, ‘Whose expectation wes that? Senator TKACHUK. Yeah Senator TKACHUK I, | think was definitely one of those individuals. “Cause h-, his comment was, well ithe's repaid then there’s no need to continue, But DELOITTE had already said to me, even if he repays we're not stopping the, the, our investigation. You know they're. DELOITTE said that te you? ‘They sald that to me and | said, no don't. Um, and, 80 March- Ish(sic) I think, there was probably a repayment and discussion of whether oF not this shculd continue and it was, no i’s continuing. ‘And then the report uh, preliminary lke a slide uh, presentation on April 16 no draft repot. In that slide presentation we saw a calendar, right, of location and with that it came out that there was 2 period in January about a ten day period in January 2011, I guess that Senator DUFFY had flled a claim for ving expenses in Ottawa ‘when in fact he had been in Florida and | thought, ugh okay, this is10 15 20 25 20 G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON’ 4J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: 6, HORTON’ JA. JOSEPH! G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 38 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 realy bad. Um, and |thought personally by vitue of that finding, that probably um, thatneedes to be refered ‘So we know now that TKACHUK called him that night and, and told him that, right? Well we f, | found tht out in committee. Uh, the moming ofthe ©, when somebody made that accusation in committee and they were saying, you know you should never have called, oh, | guess the letters, the exchange o eters in advance was the indication too, Hm. ‘And they were saying to him, you should have never have done that um, it was very political and very dirty. There's no transcript Somry (laughing). Did, did uh, s0 you had communication with people from DELOITTE fairly often imagine? Yeah, Din. Well 'm the project authority so I'd be on the phone with them you know every other day type thing, Di., did anybody from DELOITTE Gary TIMM or anybody else mention anybody from uh, THE PMO approaching them, No. Regarding this? No, no. ‘Are you aware that um, TKACHUK told DUFFY, that if he paid the money back the DELOITTE audit would be stopped? No, 'm not aware of that. 1, Buti, | have to say, it it seemed that after the money was paid that was his objective but I wasn't aware of anything, of anything, Do you know of any attion he took to uh, make sure that objective took, happened? cS10 15 20 2 2% J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A, JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A.JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 8. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: 39 ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH > 2 DATE: 2013-09-18, ‘Yes, | do know that he, he called Gary TIMM, He, he wanted Gary IMM to most with him, They met alone uh, with the Clerk. Was I there? If Iwas, | was kind of the fly on the wall and uh, | don't think Iwas there for that one. And Gary TIMM never comes io these ‘meetings alone so he would have had either Guillaume VADEBONCOEUR or Alan STEWART with him. Um, and sh-, that was where he said, okay you know uh, | think he was fishing for okay if wh, the payments been made so what's the point of continuing this investigation? That was kind of the way itwas framed with DELOITTE. ‘And uh, and they confinued. ‘Yeah, they continued Un, are you aware of anybody else let's say Senator GERSTEIN being incorporated to No, didn't know, ‘Approached, His involvement until Is-, read the media reports (Okay. Um, so he wasn't um, hs, No. Basically from your, Nota player from my perspective. And, and certainly wasn't authorized by (inaudible), No. You to approach DELOITTE, Ob ne, no, ne, no, ne, ne, NO, no. To get this thing halted. ‘Kay. ‘The um, (clearing throat the (inaudible). | would uh, sorry | would, Go ahead. Have been really surprised if anybody had beon in DELOITTE, in touch with DELOITTE directly other than the Senators being6 20 2s 20 G. HORTON: B, JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: JA JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 40 [STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 3 investigated and myself. Finance maybe that's it you know. So, (pause) DELOITTE received, DELOITTE received a confidential letter at one point it has nothing to do with this but they received a confidential letter at ore point saying that Senator GERSTEIN needed to be investigeted. And It was in the context of, the residency auditor something and his travel to China and yeah no | know, | know is just lice it was something that seemed totally off the wall and unrelated but GER,, i's GERSTEIN name, right? So uh, that's what just matlo me think of it so. Kay. Would you have had any contact with uh, Senator LEBRETON's office of anyb-, any of his staff regarding the content of the report? No, no. Um, and the other question is uh, the actual report its on your ‘computer on a shared drive or a memory stick or how does that work? Which report are you tlking about now? The, the drafts. The un, The drafts of the report? Yes. Yeah they're on the stared drive, ‘The DUFFY dra, the DUFFY drafts For ths office. Okay, Yeah ‘And uh, once they're sent out uh, electronically, paper how does that work? Like before the, tke for the meeting, Before, befo-, For the, for the meetings, For the meetings um. Yes,10 6 20 20 J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: a ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-09-18 Well keep in mind after | drafted, I sent itto uh, uh, at least 2 people. Uh, well at least uh, three people so BRAZEAU and HARB. | know the Clerk and Michel received it and Senator MARSHALL received il. | think | brought pap-, paper copies for the other members the day of the meeting. On DUFFY again the, the Cierk land Michel | didn't have direct contact with Senator TKACHUK very often, from time to time | did and um, the Clerk sentit | think to Robin HAY because itwas Robin HAY that wrote back saying and the Clerk said, you know find out or putin the date of when this form started to be used, Um, then | would have sent the electronic version | believe to Lucie to make sure that the other members had it for the meeting that day that's the way | would normally do things, So, You said that when you put together the drafts for me with, for the production order, Yes. Um, (sighing) you provided one that was m-, changed between f-, 3:30 and 5:30, Yeah Who made those charges? Its my understanding hat uh, Senators TKACHUK and STEWART OLSEN um, sort of insisted with the Clerk that, that be done, Kay. Um, whose final decision is it as to what goes in a SENATE report? You're asking a Clerk laughing) i's a committees, yeah So the three person committee, Does everybody need to be in accordance or is it just majority? Let's ust say it's a three person subcommittee, is ital 3 or just the Uh, 2 of the 32 Oh wollh-, uh, I meanit’s a majority thatll make a decision, right? So, Okay £0 looking back at th-, May 7, 8 and 9 again we know that they met May 7. Um and made some minor changes if any minor. May 8” there was um, a 2 o'clock meeting...20 2s 30 4J.A.JOSEPH G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J.A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: 4J.A, JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A.JOSEPH: G, HORTON: 2 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH As DATE: 2013-09-18 Unb Where some changes were made. Ub-hm, ‘And then between 8:30 and 5:30 more changes were made at the request of TACHUK's and Carolyn STEWART OLSEN outside of the committee mesting Ub, IF they had been diected, Unb, ‘To make those changes, Ub-hm. From somebody wihin THE PRIME MINISTER'S, Ub-hm, OFFICE, what's your thoughts on that? Okay i's speculation but um, | didn’t know what was driving them to want to make those changes after ithad already been discussed in THE SUBCOMM TTEE frankly when | got this uh, next version ‘cause Lucle did say, okay there were other changes and she sent itback to me so | knew what had happened and um, |, | just found that odd, that it would take place out of, outside of the normal processes. So knowing that that was an external inde- THE SENATE, + external audit within Ub-hm. (Or whatever you went to call, external audit? Sure. Um, ll try to word this a different way. Does THE PRIME MINISTER's OFFICE have any involvement and that should they have any involvement or are they crossing the line getting involved inn independent audit's subcommite’s business?10 5 20 2s 30 35 JA. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: JA. JOSEPH: 8. JOLETTE: J. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: JA. JOSEPH: ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH - 2 DATE: 2013-09-18 Listen Greg to be honest with ya(sic) | don't know, | don't understand politics. Ive been here for 24 years I've never been involved in the politic! side of things. |-,F, | know that they ike to talk, they consult on stuff its, that’s normal so should we be surprised if there were communications? Probably not. | mean the-, they're politicians that's what they do. So um, and how often does that happen? Probably on a lot more than we think. ‘Kay, ‘Um, (clearing throat) the fact that, did the BRAZEAU report and the HARB report verbally contested changes weren't made or major changes weren't made why hm, why do think that um, DUFFY's report was changed o” so many people wanted their hand in that? And, Yeah, Were, they were trying o protect him? For w-, do you think they ‘were trying to protect him or what did you, why do you think there ‘was that much interest in him compared to the other 27 Um. Do you think it's merely because of the repayment or do you think there's something else? | thought in par it was well | | thought @ large part oft was due to the repayment but | thought in part too | would have attributed a lot Of it just tothe individvals dealing on the report. Like Senator STEWART OLSEN yeu'll recall | had done an intemal audit report Con this, on the residency issue and she was a very uh, strong ‘opponent of the contents of my report sh-, and ju-, uh, @ big, one of the big reasons because when the Chair had first seen it he was, fhe was fine with it, Um, and then it sort of went from bad to worse from one week to the next. S-, they went from thank you for doing this to this is an in, this report, they wouldnt even have me in the meeting. They were alone with the Clerk teling him that my report was incompetent and a number of other things and um, you know she was a big driver bahind that. So, it seemed to me that she always had a different agenda from audit. Here she was a member of THE AUDIT SUBCOMMITTEE but her objective was not to get to the truth of the matters and deal with them the way ! wanted to deal with them. Her, her considerations seemed to be more lke, what's10 5 2 25 30 G. HORTON: J.B. JOSEPH: G. HORTON: J. A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 4J.A. JOSEPH: B, JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: J.A. JOSEPH: B. JOLETTE: 44 STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH DATE: 2013-0918 47 the media gonna do with this information? What do they think of it? ‘You know and managing the message type thing. And with the ‘communications baciground | thought that was kind of normal for her, her, her, her view of the world type thing. So um, on DUFFY it took me completely by surprise when the story broke. I, I, was Just lke blown away ky it nd honestly yeah | thought that um, for ‘sure they wanted to go softer on him because of the residency thing but | thought it was s-, that particular Senator STEWART (OLSEN trying to manage the message again. Trying to you know {90 easier on him because he had repaid and but |, | couldn't ignore the fact thatthe, the Florida thing was to my mind very big, you know I, would have the, they were so easy on him that night in Committee uh, th, they didn't try and comer him on that issue at all. | expected more um, s0 I, |was a very disenchanted employee, from, February to, Today. 1'm gatting better (laughing) (Laughing) ''m, | would like to leave it a few months back. Um, but was, yeah, | was very, very, fed up and I'm getting over my bttemess so but No intentions of leavirg your position? | had absolute intentions, You did? Ofeaving my postion I was taking part in a competition at uh, PUBLIC HEALTH AGENCY OF CANADA and um, | got screened out after the written exam. I'm waiting to see if something else comes up that's interesting but I'm doing better. (inaudible) ‘And jobs are not easy to come by so you know you have to do your best with what you've got. No, the reason | say that is because a lot of the people that were involved in this investigation no longer work where they were working.0 15 20 JA. JOSEPH M, PATRICE: 8. JOLETTE @. HORTON: B, JOLETTE: J. JOSEPH! 8. JOLETTE: 6. HORTON: 8, JOLETTE: G. HORTON’ Glossary: ‘STATEMENT OF Jill Anne PICKARD JOSEPH 48 DATE: 2013-09-18, (Laughing) (Laughing) When allthis was going on Nobody does. ((naudible) you're one of the, o-, besides the Senators you're one the few that stil works in the same position, Yeah, Yeah | don't have anything als. No. The time is uh, thir, 14:37. = :Word not complete (ph): Phonetic Transcriber: KR Proofreader: AY ‘Sentence cut off or not finished Revised: Laurent Léger 2013-10-15TAB B10 25 20 35 6 M, B. 6 HORTON: O'BRIEN HORTON: ORIEN HORTON: O'BRIEN: HORTON: O'BRIEN: PATRICE: JOLETTE: HORTON: ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2015-09-18 This is Exhibit Affidavit of Az PRESENT: Gary O'BRIEN Sworn before me, Wichel PATRICE Lae Cpl. Benoit JOLETTE a ot hi. pl. Greg HORTON a, y ‘A Commissioner ete. Okay, today's date is uh, September 18”, t, 2013. The time is 9:26 AM, we are at, 1885, 188, s. S in uh, Centre Block. Present is uh, Clerk of the SENATE Gary O'BRIEN, O apostrophe BREN, Correct. Michel PATRICE, Greg HORTON and Ben JOLETTE. Uh, just for the purpose of the Stenographer when she's transcribing Ill have ‘everybody state their name and occupation and then she'll know ‘our voices when she's typing this out. So we'll start with you s-,. Gary O'BRIEN, Clerk of the SENATE Michel PATRICE, SENATE Legal Counsel. Cpl. Benoit JOLETTE uh, NATIONAL DIVISION RCMP. ‘And me Greg HORTON. Okay so, the reason we're here today is ‘we're investigating, as you know, Se-, Senator DUFFY for uh, uh, breach of trust 2, allegations re-, regarding uh, living expenses uh, claiming living expenses while o-, for living in the NCR. Uh, that’s how this started, as well as other matters related to 2 $90 000 repayment of living expenses uh, which would have been subsequently repaid by Nigel WRIGHT. Um, so we're here to interview y-, you based on the fact that you're a Clerk of the ‘SENATE, had some involvement with some of the reports written by the SENATE, some communications with those involved. So Il get you to uh, frst w+ what | want to do, to begin with is tell me what you do, uh, what's your job and how long you've been here and stuff tke that.10 Fry 20 2s 30 G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G, OBRIEN: G. HORTON: ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18, (Okay. Um, Ive boon in Parliament since 1975, { worked in the Library of Parliament, Ive worked in the House of Commons and | Joined the SENATE in 1980. And | worked my way up uh, from Director of Journals, 2 Director of Committees, to Deputy Clerk and | retired in’06 after 30 some odd years and uh, I came back uh, in th, In.2009 un, a-, I was appointed uh, Cletk of the SENATE, And Uh, in that job I'm the uh, | guess you could callit the Chief Administrative Oficer of the SENATE. | um, | uh, | am the Clerk of the Interal Economy Committee, traditionally the Clerk of the ‘SENATE is the Clerk of the intemal Economy Committee. And ! was Clerk of the, | am Clerk of the Steering Committee m-, mt, Procedure and Agenca uh, Sub-Committee on Procedure and, and ‘Agenda which is knovm as the Steering Committee. And in this particular case uh, the Steering Committee uh, i's no longer the cease In, in a present tme but uh, at the time we're talking about, the Steering Committee acted as the audit Sub-Committee as well, and | was the Clerk ofthat, Uh, | guess maybe | was not Clerk of, I, guess | was Clerk of tne Audit, I think, yes you were, ‘Sub-Committee, yes, cause the problem is it went back and forth, (Coughing) Of what was Steering, what was Audit Sub-Committee and uh, that ‘was partly part of our problem. But uh, uh, so that, in that capacity um, uh, Internal Economy meets uh, on a regular basis when the SENATE is sitting every week um, and | uh, I work closely with the Chairman in driving the agenda of that Committee and uh, as the Clerk, as any Commitee Clerk, they have procedural uh, administrative and communication duties and uh, and that uh, that Is the traditional role that I, | would, | have played many times, so ''m the Clerk of that Committee and it's the same at the Steering Committee we, ‘cause we're, 've worked closely with uh, with the Chairman in uh, bringing items for uk, on, you know, for administrative matters uh, budgetary matters to uh, to the Committee, so, that’s Kay, Sounds like a lt, It's a busy job. (Laughing)6 20 2s 8. 6 6 2 2 9 o SOLETTE: OBRIEN: HORTON: O'BRIEN: HORTON: OBRIEN HORTON: OBRIEN: .. HORTON: OBRIEN: HORTON, OBRIEN: HORTON: on ee [STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 S-, So O'BRIEN who do you report to? ‘Um, my evaluation is done by the Speaker and the Chairman of Internal Economy. ‘Kay, s0 what 'm gonna ask you to do is just start at the beginning Of this whole situation (laughing) um, w-, where the matter is, referred to DELOITTE (inaudible) w-, w-, where this became an uh, expenses became an issue and then what was done about it as far a Internal Economy and then breaking it down into Sub-Committee ‘and what actions were taken and what reports were produced. Uh, and if you can start atthe beginning of that and just, 'm not gonna Interrupt you, If you eculd just bring me right through it. Okay. ‘And if you can't remeniber the dates it's just uh, its fine, it's just, you know j- a, a, a guesstmate,.. Okay. Is fine, Well | know you probably wanna start with BRAZEAU but I, think we need to understand that the SENATE ul the Audit Sub- Committee was alreacy involved in an extemal audit with Senator WALLIN. And that had begun I think in November, uh, subject to the, I,m just guessing on the date, but it was inthe, in, in the fall. And uh, that was uh, where uh, uh, there was @ smell test, well ‘more than a smell fest on, but there was a, we felt that there was. uh, enough questions unsettling uh, evidence that we needed ECA(si) uh, External Independent um, uh, Auditor to uh, help us Uh, determine what todo with these, these uh, expenses that we felt were uh, professional opinion on that. So, the a, a-, audit of Senator WALLIN was ongoing before the BRAZEAU stuf started. So,, not appropriate but wanted to get a, a, you know, Uh, uh, We already had a pattam of, Intemal audit or exterral? Was an extemal auditor... Okay.10 5 20 Fe 20 35 G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN Date 1013-09-18 Un, with DELOITTE, Okay. We had already uh, gone to DELOITTE, and on that uh, you know it’s just that there wouldn't, there are a number of auditing firms in Ottawa and we did approach different ones, but some had confit of interest that, with the client and they, so we, we, it, it was settled on DELOITTE and Gary TIMM and, and all ofthat, so. When the BRAZEAU (sighing) story came out it was driven, | think, by the press, press reports that he was not really, nobody saw him in Maniwaki uh, um, uh, that was um, again troubling and what to do ‘about it, and Imm the one who suggested we need an investigation. Un, we had done the same with, in, in, in the past y-, t, sessions with another Senator, Senator LAVIGNE and before we threw anybody to the wolves we wanted a chance to look ati internally, sive the Senators uh, uh, in question a chance to be heard. ‘There's a whole history of the SENATE doing this patter, that When there's allegations of wrongdoing before it's, its sent fo uh, th, to the police or ansthing lke that we have an internal investigation. So that a pattern the SENATE had taken uh, uly historically going back to the uh, BEAUHARNOIS scandal. And so sub-committee uh, we, uh, there b-, there was a committee, a s-, Cf intemal setup w-, a sub-committee on living allowances and ‘Senator MARSHALL w., was appointed th, the Chairman and uh, | think there was Senator COMEAU and Senator uh, CAMPBELL, three member sub-committee, approved by Intemal Economy to establish the sub-committee. So we were doing the right thing in terms of following our practice. Um, subsequently Senator HARB was added to that when again there were media stories about his. Uh, his presence in Cooden and, and uh, (sighing) and uh, that was added to it. Um, and then of course there were press stories about Uh, Senator DUFFY that he did not uh, v-, he voled in Ottawa, in Kanata, he was not voing in hi, the province to which he wh, i, ‘was appointed from. Um, and that discussion was um, uh, 1, think the first time s-, uh, again ausit Steering uh, was seized of that, was December 4", that was the fist time we discussed that. Um, it wo-, It, that, the DUFFY question and the WALLIN question remained with Steering slash Ausit, okay? Um, why was that um, uh, i's, i's rot uh, |, having trouble really remembering why that happened but it did hazpened and uh, and uh, perhaps people ot BO10 6 20 2s 30 35 40 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 wanted to reflect lite bit more on, on DUFFY. Itwasn't quite the ‘same thing in the sense that the SE-, the press stories uh, reflected con his uh, qualification as a SENATOR, which was never the case With BRAZEAU or HARB, so | don't know whether that had ‘something to do with i, but it certainly touched on living allowances. ‘And ub, the fact that uh, th-, they were doing WALLIN, I don't know whether they wanted to just uh, it was a litle bit maybe didn't wanna overload MARSHALL, | don't know whether MARSHALL uh, | dont, I don't think ub, | had, I, Inever approached Senator MARSHALL about whether she wanted to take this order of reference or not, not cn the DUFFY thing but anyway remained with Steering. And un, um, but uh, there was a decision um, in uh, February, early February uh, to refer DUFFY to DELOITTE. Now there was a conversation in Steering whether it should go directly to the police. | know Senator FUREY w-, flt that ub, uh, that uh, we shouldn't just fool around with this, that was too big a question for us to really uh, uh, come to, come to grips with. Um, he felt it was > pretty obvious uh, ‘hat he was not qualified as a Senator from Pl, it should go diredty to police but uh, again there was a feeling that perhaps there should again be a chance, you know, following our normal practice before we refer things to police we do do an Internal investigation on this thing. Again I'm the one, but Jil Anne had su-, Jill Anne JOSEPH who | think youl be meeting later uh, who's our intemal Aucitor, said well wouldn't it be great if DELOITTE handled everything, ‘cause they're already handling WALLIN, they'e already uh, by then Senator MARSHALL was on-, had already referred, brought in DELOITTE for uh, DUFFY and, or for BRAZEAU and HARB. And uh, uh, so if, 1 passed on Jill ‘ive it to DELOITTE and they got all four of them. And that would be great because they know the SENATE, they how the SENATE works, as opposed to another Auditor, you have to start all over again, and uh, there ‘Anne's suggestion to Steering that let's, was no conflicts of interest, they were, they were our Auditor and 0, yes we did that. Um, so, just so that you know um, {think we decided this on, around Thursday December the 3, no, the, the, the on f, on uh, February ub, 7", Thursday February the 7”. ‘Steering agreed that it should go to DELOITTE, DUFFY should go to DELOITTE. Um, | received a phone call at home from Senator ‘TKACHUK that Thursday night and as | recall the conversation he sald Mike has, Mike is okay with it going to DELOITTE but he wants 552 15 2» 2s 3 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 54 DATE: 2013-09-18 a legal opinion on his, his um, residency qualifcation. And uh, ws we had felt, we'd talked about this many times that Internal Economy's jurisdiction re-, re, uh, deals with financial matters they, they don’, i's not committee appointed to deal wth constitutional ‘matters. So Internal Economy authorizing, or requesting 8 legal opinion on DUFFY's residency qualification might be a litle bit ultra vires so | suggested to TKACHUK well let's say that um, you, Senator TKACHUK and FUREY, Senator FUREY the Deputy Chair as leaders of the SENATE uh, request a legal opinion. And, and S- » Senator TKACHUK said that’s great Il call m gonna tak to George and that’s, wel, well make sure that’s okay. So anyway, on February the 8, a, and Im assuming (laughing) this is a Friday ‘cause | recall it came in early and um, we got this news release out that DUFFY had been referred to DELOFTTE, | thnk it was the frst news release that even mentioned that, | think it said someone hike the appropriate sub-committees of Internal Economy have referred this, cause MARSHALL had already refered dit out to DELOITTE, (Unknown person clearing throat) G. O'BRIEN: (On BRAZEAU and HARB but it had not been publicly released. So this was the first public released statement that uh, that DUFFY, HARB and BRAZEAU had been referred to external auditors and in ‘addition that the Chair and Deputy Chairman of intemal Economy hnad asked for a legal apinion with respect to Senator DUFFY'S residency qualification. Now, | think we have to go back a ite bit because the fact that um, before Christmas, Internal Economy, because of the, the controversy in the press about labelling uh, living allowances, Senators getting housing allowances um, and ‘maybe not uh, not realy living in thelr primary residence uh, they had asked um, Internal Economy had agreed to ask all Senators to put uh, markers down about drivers licence um, income tax returns, health card, and whers you vote, um, uh, and that an internal aul ‘would be done on, ontiving and housing uh, housing an-, housing allowances. Um, and uh, again there was press release to that cffect um, um, and uh, uh, this had begun so the, the internal audit hhad started before Christmas and Senators had until the end of January, something le that, to put down these uh, to, give to ill ‘Anne ub, their uh, uh, this evidence of their housing allowances. So, (clearing throat) this was all going on in the background this,15 20 25 20 38 40 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 study, this internal audit study and ul, it uh, it was controversial s-, caught into, I supported it completely with the conclusions of the Internal audit | had, | feel, | felt they were very uh, helping us do @ road map to get out ofthis problem and had some very uh, you know, was, was quite broad on all the issues that deal with uh, with ‘allowances. And uh, but it would, ran into a lot of trouble at, Steering and, and slash internal aucit they felt twas highly er-, and itwasn't, we wanted to make it public, it wasn't the staff that made it ‘but an internal audit should ve remained uh, confidential to, within In the institution. But uh, someone, | thought it was TKACHUK or it might have been LEBRETON had claim that ll audits were gonna bbe made public, so this is what was driving a big disagreement between me and Steering on this whole issue, that | felt that they ‘were not uh, they were not um, really acting property as an audit ‘Sub-Committee they were more concerned, an audit Sub- Committee has real professional uh, duties and obligations to look after, you know, the public f, funds and the probity ofall that. Uh, | {elt that they were more concerned with th-, as, as an Internal Economy or S-, Steering Committee more interested in the, in the pk, you know the politics ofthe institution and not, not uh, n-, not {acting as an independant audit sub-committee and so | had suggested to Senator TKACHUK that um, that uh, the whole thing, DUFFY and WALLIN go to Senator MARSHALL’s sub-committee, that she would have al of the audits. Um, and that what done uh, ‘that, | don’t know when these be, I think these, | don't know when those meetings took piace but |, made the suggestion, it was not accepted. Uh, the wanted to keep the WALI, they wanted to keep DUFFY, they wanted 2 keep uh, keep um, uh, WALLIN and uh, maybe Senator MARSHALL didn't want ft, | don't know but it didn't happen, and that's how this thing. Now as I said, since then we have made a very important procedural change in the Senate that the Audit Sub-Committee is not the Steering Committee, we have 1a, an independent sub-committee on audit, i's stil @ sub-committee cf Internal Economy, but Im very pleased with that uh, that uh, change that was made and take it out of the hands of Steering (Clearing throat) | think this thing could have been, that's my ‘opinion and | know you stick to facts but | felt that that would have been helpful to make this whole thing more properly uh, ‘administered as we, as we went forward. So uh, so let uh, we uh, ‘we had this uh, situation and um, Senator TKACHUK uh, he um,0 2s 38 40 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 th, he and as I s-, asl, I sald, he and | worked very closely. Um, and uh, I know he asked me to uh, fo accompany him to a meeting with DELOITTE, he wanted to meet Gary TIM and DELOITTE uh, on his own. But he did ask me to come to the meeting, that, ‘meeting took place here in uh, in uh, my office. It was not uh, uh, ‘something that uh, | think MARSHALL was very disappointed that Senator TKACHUK met on his own with the auditors. | think uh, FURY was very uh, very concerned that he was doing it again and said he shouldn't be doing i, But th-, th, that meeting was uh, | thought uh, very straight forward, that Senator TKACHUK um, asked DELOITTE, you know, the v-, questions he was asking, well ‘what, what would hapsen more procedural and financial, this is what he was more concerns were, the terms of procedure, what ‘would happen if Senalor DUFFY did not cooperate with the, with the auditors. And Gary TIMM he, he had brought another partner with him so that there was two of them there, and they s-, said very Clearly that, you know. that there's nothing they can do about that, that it would be noted in the report that Senator DUFFY did not uh, did not cooperate, and that was just left at that. And um, he wanted to know about the uh, the cost, how much this was all costing and the wanted to know the timeframe of when we would be finished. ‘So, that was as I said, | thought (clearing throat) this was, and, and | think we discussed uh, what was F, found out by meeting with DELOITTE with Steerng. Uh, b-, telling them what would ha-, what, what's, what DELOITTE had told us, so there was uh, | don't think there was anything untoward about that. Um, moving on then to DELOITTE’s report um, and the um, uh, the busiest probably, the busiest time of my career was leading up to that uh, May 8" report that uh, Internal did inwhich we table in the Senator presented in the SENATE um, th-*h, the biggest journal that had ever been produced in the history of the SENATE because it included all 3 uh, DELOITTE audits on DUFF-, on DUFFY, HARB and BRAZEAU. Plus we had done a un, thorough analysis of the Travel Policy and we had 12 recommendations, and that had gone through a number ‘of meetings both at tha administration level and atthe Sta-, and at the Intemal Economy and Steering to uh, to m-, make these ‘amendments to the Travel Policy. Anything, everything came {together on, during that week including uh, | think uh, you know, meetings on the Tuesday uh, 'm, Im not sure the sequence of the meetings but clearly Steering met on the Wednesday uh, 50 I guess 5610 20 2s 30 35 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘that would be May 8" Um, and uh, the other issue that was also ‘very much on our mind was the natural rights of the Senators who ‘were under uh, investigation and the report that was coming out that they have @ chance to be properly heard and uh, and had uh, ‘an opportunity to partcipate in the proceedings. So we had letters, ‘going out to all three Senators ul, inviting them to come and they ‘were welcome to bring their lawyer and making sure they'd Understood where the rooms was, the meeting was to be held, and th, and whether they, they were to get a copy of the report before the meeting. Anyway there was a number of things on our plate. ‘Um, so we met un, Stzering met on uh, the Wednesday, we first ‘met with Senator MARSHALL’ Steering although she was invited fo come to the Steerirg meeting. And um, the um, the issue of natural rights and whet to do about that, we resolved that, we got the letter of invitations out to all three Senators. The meeting was coming up at 5:30, there was to be a lock up at 5:30 with the full Intemal Economy Cornmittee, they were to get the, we start at 5:30, ‘get some diner, read the report forthe firs ime, have an hour to digest i, then at 6:20 we were to have DELOITTE come in, all three Senators were invited. | don't know we were trying to track down BRAZEAU. | think BRAZEAU's (inaudible) Iawyer was calling us wanting to know a litle bit more about this uh, he never did show up. Uh, DUFFY showed up uh, DUFFY did not have his Lawyer with him, she was busy, uh, so he came on his own. Uh, HARB brought his Lawyer, s0 as you can see there was quite alot of activity that day. So, we are talking about approving the Sub- Committee report, the Audit Sub-Committee or slash Steering (Unknown person clearing their throat) G. OBRIEN: Report. MARSHALL had, was going to also report on BRAZEAU ‘and HARB, Steering was gonna report on DUFFY. We had our discussions, as | sald, we dealt first with the Natural Right issue, “Then we got into final | think we had met once before on the d- drafts of the audit su-, of the report on DUFFY, but now we were coming up, we had tomake these decisions. So at 02:00, then we started our final approval, there were further changes made to the report at the full, at the Audit Sub-Committee. (Coughing) And uh, land then we all had, you know kc, start to get ready for the 6:30 meeting, Start to get the new draft in both official languages so there was a lot of activity going on, So! would say about 4:18,10 a5 20 38 10 or oo ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘maybe 4 f, | think it was after 4 uh, Senator TKACHUK came down to my office and said wanna see, | wanna see this report on DUFFY before it goesinto the full committee. So | got the latest draft that had come out ofthe 2 o'clock meeting (coughing) and he ‘ante, he wanted fo look at it one more time. He was looking at his, his notes, he had, ! was showing him what the final dr, what the draft was gonna Icok lke, and I think ths, in the drafts uh, you wore given when the RCMP asked forall the drafts of the, of the uit of the, ofthe report, (clearing throat) as I recalled | think i's draft 5 that Is the most important one for us. So, because draft 5 | think isthe one that did go to the, to the full committee at 5:30. So, Senator TKACHUK came in here after 4, he wanted to look at this, and he reviewed it and he said | want Ca-, Carolyn and | would ike ‘two more changes. (Clearing throat) The two changes were um, deleting uh, the comment that his travel patterns were Ottawa PEI Ottawa, and uh, in the conclusion the uh, to delete that his uh, continued presence in Ottawa does not support his declaration, his declaration for a uh, primary and secondary residence. Now, this is Uh, these are procedural questions, as | was trying to say, this was th, there was no time for a further meeting. Technically, in hindsight, we should've s-, uh, we should've said look, (Unknown person clearing their throat) 6. OBRIEN: ‘We want uh, (clearing throat) you want, you know, you'r the majority on the commitee, there's only three of them on the committee s0 the two of them want this change, it should be ratified ata meeting uh, before t-, proceduraly, that's the right way to do it. (Coughing) There was no time, there was no time to do thal. | had assumed and you gotta understand when you're only a three ‘member sub-committee dealing with the number of issues that {9085 on in the adminis-, you know, in uh, with that Steering deals with, there are many irformal conversations to arrive at, at uh, final ‘conclusions. | had ascumed that Senator TKACHUK was gonna talk to Senator FUREY about these further changes. In fact the three of us, at the 5:30 meeting, we talked an awful ot, the three of us were standing there talking, but we never did talk about these further changes. |, | should've brought ito FUREY's attention. 1 Legal Counsel , she had talked to me, she made other changes, 50 !'m, 'm not quite sure which number got to the May 7" meeting Okay, so the, like the meeting, the committee receives a draft on May the 7 um, are you part of that meeting at all? Oh yes. ‘And that's the three person commitee? Yes, Im the Cierk of that committe, “Kay, s0, So you'te, are you in there when, So, Im always there. ‘They received the drat? Oh, yeah. I'm the one who gave them the drat (Laughing) Yeah Okay, (laughing) uh uh, Fm not there so I don't know. No, no. Un, so what communication, or what conversation happens in that committee between FUREY, STEWART OLSEN and um, TKACHUK and yourself? Who else is present first of al? Legal Counsel's present, our Director of Finance Is present, now | can't be sure about, because it was sensitive I'm not sure whether there was a restricted uh, who was there but certainly Jill Anne and | wore, were there ane my, most likely Michelle was there. Not sure ifthe Director of Finance was there, she might have been. Um, we sort of have core, core staffers who come to Steer, uh, to this committee, sub-committee, Steering, you know, usually the Director of HR would be there, Um, and, and my, my Executive Assistant Lucie who's been al-, always be, ifm there Lucie is usualy always: there with me, Lucie LAVOIE. Um, but on this particular case because we were dealing with sensitive uh, uh, Is think it would,20 » 35 2 9 29 eo HORTON: O'BRIEN: . HORTON ORIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: 7 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 65 DATE: 2013-09-18 alittle bit more resticied so | think it would probably M-, Michelle, Lill Anne, myself and Lucie, and maybe Nicole. ‘And the three Senators? (Oh, and the three Serators, no staffers from their viewpoint, just the three Senators, yes. Nene PMO people? No, no, no Okay, just, No. (Okay. And what's, exalain to me the process that goes on. They receive the report, they re-, review it, you presented it, what kind of conversation goes on then? Well we um, they would have had it before the meeting, so they ‘would have had a uh, you know, ‘cause they're uh, would've been sent to them before s0 they could uh, review it. Uh, {think probably ‘we might have sentit io the Chairman first, | suspect I did and | ‘would not, | would always, you know, i, before any agenda item gets to, o Steering | would go ever the agenda with, with Senator TKACHUK. | might ha-, Is. ||, really don't remember but I, my normal practice would be, I would've gone over the report with him before it hit Steoring. He would have seen it, he would have made comments on it. Um, he's a busy guy but on the things lke this he Uh, you know uh, but a fist glance he hasn't had, maybe had the chance to talk to his colleagues, he hasn't really had a chance to think aboutit, So he would've v-, he would've viewed it before it hit the committee that's for sure. And all three of them woulda, you know, you would, you, before you have a meeting you gotta have, you do d-, you give them advance notice of the items that are on the agenda so uh, you know, you get the meeting going. So they ‘would've already had time to have read it so when they came fo the ‘meeting they already had their comments pro-, we, so we probably started the discussion say, well you've seen the draft report, what are your comments? | w-,| talk about this, talk about tha, is that clear enough? And gone through it uh, elther paragraph by paragraph or holus belus, but they, th-, they ws, the, they would've had a good run at looking at all aspects of the reportFry 15 20 25 z HORTON: O'BRIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: O'BRIEN: HORTON OBRIEN: HORTON: ODRIEN: HORTON: OBRIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: OBRIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: PATRICE: HORTON O'BRIEN: 18 66 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘And if they proposed changes or agree on changes it would then, what would happen? Well then that would, that w-, we agreed and then so, and the next draft the, those changes would've appeared. So Jil Anne would take that back and make the changes? Yeah, she was the one who was coordinating these changes, you know, working with Lucie, my Assistant, uh, the m-, uh, ‘cause Lucie's taking, you know, some notes and doing, doing the draft ‘minutes and this, she's the recording Secretary, so (Okay, And then uh, after that there's another meeting on the 8” um, of the entire Sub-Committee again, Yes. | gather. Um, ean you remem, This isthe 2 o'clock meeting that | was talking about That's the 2 o'clock? Okay. Yes, Um, do you recall I guess you probably told me what happened in there. Is hard when | No, and | understand, We talked to so many people that. | understand. ‘And everybody has a different version of events, No. Right? (Laughing) (Laughing) ‘And |, so | have a version in my head of, how | think happened but, No, that’s fine, that’s fine, yeah,Fr 15 2s 20 G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. O'BRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: 19 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 Um, do you recall the conversations that happened in there or, let me just back up a bit, at some point uh, Senator STEWART (OLSEN and TKACHUK came to you, or no TKACHUK came to you. So, do you want to change, ‘Alter, after, ater that meeting, ‘Alter the 2 o'clock meeting Uh, uh, a, ater that 2 o'lock meeting So do you know, you were inthe 2 o'clock meeting? Yes. ‘Were these two major changes that they proposed after the meeting proposed in trat meeting? No. Okay. (Pause) Um, the meting was at, Now, does he-, he-, hex, uh, yeah, we, no they weren't but, a, a5 said they, this was such a rush thing I, | don’t know whether they had reflected it. you know. lke w-, we were sort of making it up as ‘we were going along of, don't lke this wording, can we get this ‘wording and should this go in, 'm not sure this should go in. Um, yyou know, it was not uh, to bring the hammer down, it only, it was, it was pretty fluid discussion, Ub-hm, ‘And uh, but we did come out of the meeting with what we had agreed too. And then as | said after uh, 4 o'clock he said well ‘wanna see uh, | wanna see this final report that’s going in at 5:20, make sure you guys g2t It right and all that kind of stuf, And 1 ‘showed him and then ne said well, Carolyn and | want these two things. So they had obviously discussed what, how they could a-, ‘amend it again, you krow, and uh, Do we know, or do you know if, if George FUREY had, was advised prior to that? What's yor, “That these two other changes were,, Yeah. Gonna be made? No, | don't think he was.1s 25 30 35 G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. O'BRIEN: 20 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 65 DATE: 1013-09-18 Okay. | dont, Ive talked to Senator FUREY un, I, | shouldn't say that, (laughing) as, as DELOITTE, as we were reading the reports into the Chamber he suddenly realized well where did this, how come this came out. And | told him quite frankly, | said took there was 2, further changes made before that 6:30 meeting. 1, I was quite open ‘with him on that, Andum, told TKACHUK after | sab, ‘cause he came to me after we &, we, you know, we sort of, what a day, and ‘we came and kinda urwound together here, and I said, you know, George is not happy at all that there were these changes, he said ‘well Il talk to him, And he was kind of, he didn't think itwas a big deal, in fact | think TKACHUK came up to him after, said you did a {good job David. |, | thnk, you know, he sai he told me I did a {g00d job. So, uh, as said the two of them worked, | gotta say that even though they had very strong disagreements, there was a good respect and we talked about that, And you know TKACHUK said, | sai, uh, he said to me many times, he said when |, when fm CChaleman tm gonna treat George exactly the way he treated me when | was Deputy Chair, which means he bent over backwards with me, And | told that to Senator FUREY, he said yooh you know, we, he's a vary, he's, 60, he did go out of his way to talk to ‘Senator FUREY on all sors of issues through the whole time he was Deputy Chair. They had a very good working relationship, Okay. Um, just for my o-, own understanding, the 5:30 meeting that was a Standing Committee meeting? ‘Yeah, full committee, yes, Okay. ‘The Standing Commitee. Um, In camera and uh, as said, we h-, had glven advanced notice ‘there would be a lockup with the DELOITTE report so they could read it themselves on their own and then at 6:20 DELOITTE would come in to talk about all three of them. But we only talked, well we talked in general but we, they, we, specifically HARB was talked 2 lot and BRAZEAU never showed up, soit mostly focused on HARB, DUFFY was there buthe uh, we didn't really get into DUFFY at all10 Fry 30 as G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: 21 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 6g DATE: 2013-09-18 Was there any discussion to change uh, the BRAZEAU or HARB reports by TKACHUK or, MARSHALL, I wasn't part of MARSHALL's sub-committee, | was Not the Clerk of that committe, Okay. That was, Jill Anne was the Clerk ofthat committee. (Clearing throat) In the, in the &:30 meeting, no there was uh, wel, Okay. | guess the question cf whether fo refer to the police uh, HARB and BRAZEAU was discussed. Uh, ua, | think Senator MARSHALL felt that DELOITTE didn'tuncover any frau-, any, there was no evidence of any fraud or wrongdoing. Uh, she felt that her hands ‘were tied that th, there wasn't evidence there to, so all they, they did though, were very clear, they disagreed with DELOITTE that this eligibility for a housing allowance was very clear. Very clear that in order to be eligble your primary residence had to 100 K outside of the NCR. It couldn't be any clearer, no fine print to Understand that, i's a very simple concept that had been died into Senators from the very beginning when they're given uh, an Crientation guide. Anc she felt that this uh, the evidence DELOITTE was showing was that they uh, did not uh, qualify for this thing and uh, HA-, wth HARB they wanted the money repaid beyond just the 2 years DELOITTE had looked at, but F, since the time he was @ Senator. ‘So speaking, s-, since we're on that topic | was gonna touch on it, ‘cause I'l forget it by the end, Regarding the rules ard policy and travel policy claim, policy uh, ¢-, do you see any ambiguity then? DELOITTE says there's ambiguity in there and that the, its not clear. 2, atthe end but Il do it right now, if | do not. Not on the eligibility, no. | agree that the SENATE has still {got some work to do on th-, uh, uh, 'm talking about the primary residence, that fo me is ear, that's the basic eligibilty criteria. To {qualify for this $22 000 housing allowance your primary residence hhas to be 100 K outside of the NCR. The time you spend in the, as your secondary residence, ist i's the time you spend, | mean, I think we can start doing a better job on maybe tracking you're and \Ws, and Internal is already onto that, of how much time, what0 35 20 2s HORTON: OBRIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON - O'BRIEN: HORTON: ORIEN HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: OBRIEN HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: . O'BRIEN: HORTON: 2 "G STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN : DATE: 2013-09-18 appropriate amount of time you are spending at your secondary residence. Because the point of itis, and the whole travel policy is you go heme, you come to Ottawa but your place of Ottawa uh, place of work is not in Ottawa. When you're in Ottawa you're on travel status, you gotta have a reason to be here in Ottawa. Right, so your wife and your dog shouldn't be here in Ottawa and, Exactly, ‘And your bank accourt Exactly. You're, you're working here, you're, you're, you're coming 9 status but you go home. here because of work, you're on trav So DUFFY's pattern of fying Ottawa PEI Ottawa, It’s not good, Okay. Uh, So in my view, | totaly agree that there's no ambiguity on the basic eligibility criteria, “Kay, 20 knowing whatyou know, speaking and uh, ! peak about all three of them, BRAZEAU, HARB and DUFFY um, their claims of living in the NCR allawance, claiming that their primary residence ‘were HARB in Cobder, BRAZEAU in, Uh, Maniwaki and uh, Wadena, DUFFY in PEL, Oh, oh sorry, I'm talking about Pamela (laughing) okay, no, no, 90, (Laughing) No, 'm not. no, DUFFY in Prince Edward Istand, Yeah. Is it your opinion or understanding that th-, their primary residence is uh, are not in those locations, they're in Ottawa, or in the NCR? | agreed with what they, what intemal had done, the conclusion they had reached Okay.10 2s 30 G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: (Pause) 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G, OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: 23 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 Which was make them repay with interest. Um, Ben's gonna have a bunch of questions regarding uh, some things there. I'm gonna review my notes ‘cause | know I have more. (Clearing throat) (Pause) | have a series of emails and the majority ‘of them are not to you or from you, however you are mentioned in ‘some of these emails, We'llgo through them and I'l show them to you and let you have @ look and then | have specific questions to ‘ask about these emails and what is said in the emails. Obviously you can't speak for other people but it’s just more of a um, there are) ‘specific things where # says | spoke to the Clerk today, I just talked {to him and uh, and you'll see as we go. If you have any questions th, go ahead. Uh, there's one side question um, Greg asked about um, the uh, meetings on May 8" and May 9" whether uh, PMO. staff were there um, and you responded no. However, there had been previous uh, I qLess meetings, you sald weekly meetings um, Internal Economy, Yes, ‘And uh, Steering uh, Commitee, Yes, Um, let's just say from the time that this began in the fall of 2012 Until the reports were um, um, written and presented on May 9" um, were PMO staff ever present at any of these uh, No. Committee meetings. No. (Okay. (Long pause) The, did you ever receive a phone call um, email or did anybody ever come um, to your office or meet you at any time with uh, direction, questions regarding the draft reports, ‘somebody from PMO? No. ‘Okay. The first one I'm gonna show you here it's a, I've labelled it document number 1, #s 10:24, Andit's an email chain uh, dated2 5 2 2s 2» 35 6. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: B, JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 24 MD STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 February 7, 2013 and you're not, you're not included I, inthe from or to or carbon copied whatsoever. However it's discussions regarding sending the um, audit to DELOITTE, specifically for ‘Senator DUFFY. Hm. (Clearing throat) So, 'm just gonna read it out, Il let you have @ Took and then Ii have questions after. So the first emails F-, February 7", 2013 at 3:59 PM. It's from Christopher MONTGOMERY, Yes. ‘To Chris WOODCOCK, Rémi MOREAU and Joanna KENNY. And it says the Steering Committee of Internal Economy has taken the decision to lump DUFFY's residency ciaim in with those of HARB, ‘and BRAZEAU for auditing, This willbe indicated by media release before the day is ended. (Clearing throat) The next email is from Chris WOODCOCK addressed to Nigel WRIGHT, Andrew MACDOUGALL, DOUGALL, Ray NOVAK, Joanne MACNAMARA and it says incoming, ‘These are all PMO steffers, 1m. Yes, Pretty sure. |'m just gonna, and the response from Nigel WRIGHT to this um, message um, Ill read i all out to you and then there's a specific tab that (just lke to make reference to. So it says, spent the last hour ‘on various phone calls with Mike, David, TKACHUK and Marjory David stil needs to werk it out so it is only at 90% certain-, certainty level. But what will tkely happen is that at 9, 10 Friday the release will go out stand, stating that HARB, BRAZEAU and DUFFY expense cases are beng referred to an external auditor. Concurrently a separate release would go out stating something like, with respect to Senator DUFFY the Chair Committee has requested external legal advice on the meeting of the terms. resident and primary residence. A purpafal-, purpose of this isto [put Mike in a different aucket and to prevent him from going squlrelly ina bunch of weekend panel shows, Ray, Mike is very pleased with this so it wll give us alte bit of time if David can pull6 20 25 20 35 (Pause) G. OBRIEN: 6B. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN < DATE: 2013-09-18 Itoff. David is making his calls now to the SENATE Clerk and the cther two committee members but | think he will get it done, Marjory is fully on-board. Youcan have a look if you'd lke. (Clearing throat) Well || in my opening remarks, Yes. | alked about this, Yeah ‘And I got. call home, at home and | thought that Senator ‘TKACHUK had already gone back to Saskatoon, saying that Mike either doesn't have a problem with going to DELOITTE, we'd already made the decision that aftemoon, it was going to DELOITTE. But that he doesn’t have re-, uh, but he wants a legal pinion, that’s what, that's what he told me. And, what did you say ‘about um, external legal opinion, extemal legal advice on the ‘mening ofthe terms, Well hat, that's, okay, weil it, so I convinced him that uh, why he, we didn't talk about external, it was never clear twas, it would be extemal or intemal. First we thought our M-, Me, th, Michelle's uh, boss, Mark OTSINT(ph) the Legal Counsel would do this legal opinion um, uh, but he didn't doit. And um, um, 0 had suggested that as, as I said that the ch-, that the wording of the press release say that the Chair and the Deputy Chair, because Intemal does not deal with constitulional issues, have s-, as leaders of the SENATE ui, requested this and Senator TKACHUK said well Il speak to George. Anyway, when we came inhhere at 9 o'clock he wanted to look at her before 9, | quess we were here at 8:30 and | know Chris MONTGOMERY was very Interested to make sure this was going out on time. Um, and um, We uh, || think he had said |, or| don't know whether he said I had spoken to George but! guess he had. Senator FUREY has never objected that his name was used in this press release. So, yes | ‘can confirm that uh, but itwasn't a separate news release, it was um, itwas uh, it was part ofthe one news release. ‘Okay. (Pause) There are other emails but Ill read you another one ‘um, that's in the seme chain, on February 7, 2013 from un, Chris MONTGOMERY to Nigel WRIGHT, Marjory LEBRETON and20 6 2 25 35 G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 26 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN ? DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘Sandy MELLOW. Andi states, | just got off the phone with TKACHUK on the advice of the Clerk, they're going to say thatthe Chair and Deputy Chair of the committee have requested Independent legal advice as opposed to referring to the Steering Committee, so as to rot make it an official process in order to protect Senator DUFFY. Un, i's a litle bit what you said um, uh, the wording of what was gonna be reported. However my question is um, why differentiate DUFFY from the other Senators under review and uh, who's idea was this and what was the goal of, | quess, the wording, | know you didn't write this, but protecting ‘Senator DUFFY, why? |. don't know. Yeah | don't know um, pff, Luh, well they we, they were, BRAZEAU and HARB uh, was never, was never a constitutional issue. Uh, HARB was an Ontario Senator uh, you know, || have the map over there Cf the Quebec uh, ridings that d-, BRAZEAU has prope-, well he claims he had property in that, so he was clearly a Quebec resident. Um, DUFFY uh, the question in the media was, was he, now he had already ma-, avays maintained that he was and no, ‘and uh, Ive talked, well ve talked to many Senators, ve, Ive talked, | had long conversations with the Leader of the opposition Senator COWAN, you know, and uh, he said well maybe he does, you know, we, we don't know, we'd like to, and we'd like eventually to have this clarified and it's stil the number one item on my agenda that we gotta clear up this issue of residency. What uh, ‘what is, what, what uh, what does it mean and how is it to be defined? Because, while it's true, Internal Economy doesn't deal with constitutional issues, it has to clear up, clean up the mess that this has all caused, you know? So, i's the interest of the SENATE that we do get this thing uh, clarified, But t-, so think DUFFY thinks he, | think he trought he was a resident, |, | th, | think he thought in his own mind and he did not fear to have a legal opinion. |, that's all | could guess. In our in, investigation we've spoken to numerous people and uh, read countless documents and it appears that um, Senator DUFFY ‘was set aside as opposed to uh, Senator BRAZEAU and Senator th, HARB for um, @ ssecific reason and was being treated10 15 20 2s Fy G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: (Pause) B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: ar ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN ne DATE: 2013-09-18 i differently. Um, yourself and your office um, was that, what was the, the, the primary coal ofthe uh, of completing the reports? Was itto protect Senator DUFFY or to get to the bottom of uh, The, the, the primary goal of which reports? Of. of, of yourself uh, of your office and of, My office? Yes. Well we want, you know we were asked, nol us, but the, through DELOITTE, through the m-, was to, to do uh, an analysis of the facts with respect to his primary end secondary residence. And uh, that’s what we, that was the only thing, are w-, driving us are what are the facts ofthis situation Allright, the uh, secord uh, document, document number 2, its now 10:33. (Pause) fs an email chain dated February 13" to the 18, 2013 and It conteins discussions among uh, PMO staff Chris MONTGOMERY um, | believe there's uh, Senator LEBRETON as well and i's regarding an income tax option to secure residency for the Senators under review. Does that ring any bell to you? Not at al, Okay, No, (Unknown person clearing their throat) 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: ‘The first tab that | have here i's an email from Senator Marjory LEBRETON to Nigel WRIGHT, Sandy MELLOW, Chris MONTGOMERY and Patrick ROGERS who are um, the last two staff of uh, PMO. Andit indicates tab 1 here that um, (clearing throat) 'm not aware of any special instructions or bulletins uh, uh, regarding Income Tax Act but we will check with the Clerk's office {0 determine what procedures are followed, for | guess uh, um, where you, you have your incame tax uh, per calendar here, p- per calendar year. Do you remember anyone, No.10 15 20 25 B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: (Pause) 8. JOLETTE: G. HORTON’ B. JOLETTE: ©. HORTON: 6. OBRIEN: HORTON: 6. OBRIEN 8, JOLETTE 6. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: 28 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18, From Senator LEBRETON's office contacting you? No. Or one of your staffs speaking about this uh, regarding an income tax option in p-, uh, securing, No, | guess residency? Not me directly. No? Whether she contacted uh, uh, the Finance Department directly I, 1 don't know, I've nev-, never was brought to my attention, The uh, next tab i's an email from Nigel WRIGHT to Patrick ROGERS, Chris WOCDCOCK and Benjamin PERRIN. Nigel WRIGHT speaking to his 3 PMO staff uh, uh, indicates, | get the impression uh, again te date is uh, February 18" now, 2013 uh, thie email. It ays, | get the improsaion that Senator TKACHUK ie too led around by the Clerk and by Counsel. Som dubious that he wil, (Laughing) Get the residency thing resolved def, definitively, correctly and quickly. Is this a fair satement? (Laughing) | can't just uh, (Laughing) (Laughing) What? Wellit say. It's from Nigel WRIGHT? ‘This is what Nigel WR GHT writes, where he, | get the impression that Senator TKACHUK is too led around by the Clerk, a10 20 2s G. HORTON: 6. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G.OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 29 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18, And by Counsel ‘And by Counsel ‘And by Counsel. So fm dubious that he will get the residency thing resolved definitively, correctly and quickly Uh, well this ub, like you gotta read that frst pers-, paragraph or the first part ofthat paragraph, Hm, TACHUK's sub-committee is interviewing ZIMMER and PATTERSON today, or tomorrow, why? | think they both have ‘qualification residency issues. So I'm concemed that the Interview is more about than just expenses. | get the impression that, ‘TKACHUK is to led around by the Clerk and by Counsel. So I'm dubious that he wil gt the residency thing resolved definitively, correctly and quickly. (Sighing) Why would Nigel WRISHT say that um, (Inausible) For you, obviously you didn't write this, you didnt receive thi No. ‘And you don't know wiat they're talking about to a certain degree. But (Coughing) Um, i, is this a fair statement? Is this uh, Well, that he's to led around, too led around? No. | (laughing), but TKACHUK uh, |, | think he's a fair man |, think he um, uh, 1, think hi, uh, well think he was always, you know, many uh, f, 1 don't know what to tellya’, | was gonna say he does the right thing | was, | was hoping he, | try to convince him always to do the right thing. { mean, if there's ub, i's my job as the Clerk to make sure that we do the right thing all the time, Uh, he always listened to me, Um, you know uh, WALLIN, we did the right thing, we referred it to ‘uh, DELOITTE. Um, uh, we've done the right thing with DUFFY referring him to DELOTTE. Um, |, you know, | was ver, |, &, funny that press conference where DUFFY said Im gonna repay ‘and uh, and um, uh, bat you know I didn’t do anything wrong, he20 2s 35 G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: (Pause) B. JOLETTE: G, OBRIEN: TTE: 6. OBRIEN: 30 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 78 DATE: 2013-09-18 called me from Saskatchewan, he said let's listen to this together, he's going on national TV. So he was on the phone and | was here ‘and | was watching it, we were watching it together and I said look at that shit, you know, he didn't even apologize, you know? ‘Cause that's the one thing we had talked about, if DUFFY is gonna repay, its gotta be that, you know, he um, he's sorry uh, he didn't mean to uh, you know, he, he didn't mean to take, th, that there was some kind of contrition ub, some kind of uh, apology. Like um, the ‘example we always use down in the HOUSE OF COMMONS was th, the MP from Toronto who took the housing allowan-, or the uh, ‘condo she had her people living uh, Oh, i's Judy SGRO Judy SGRO Judy SGRO and, but she apologized. | didn't realize, | wasn't elig- you know, she made the uh, uh, uh , she repaid but she made an ‘apology that she shouldn't have, you know, she shouldn't have done that and apologized to her colleagues. There was none of that in DUFFY’s press, press uh, thing and TKACHUK was very Upset about that, very upset about thet. And, ‘cause | was caying he should do what Judy SGRO doi-, did, | mean that’s f you have broken the rules, you «now, you, and you're gonna repay but put, go the extra thing for your colleagues because you've embarrassed ‘your colleagues, you brought shame on the institution, you should th, you should apologize. So, so uh, he, whether I led him around Con that, I don't know, Idon't know. Um, (Clearing throat) Um, throughout our, our investigation like | said before um, we've leamed that PMO has had a lot of um, ‘communication with the diverse Senators who were involved in uh, these committees and sub-committees and, which is why | asked you uh, eatlir if, if en/body from the PMO ever contacted you, Yeah, ‘What have you. And sh, you'll see there are more tabs later on ‘where you'll see, | quess, the extent of the PMO involvement in uh, these sub-committees and... Okay.10 3s 0 2% B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: G. OBRIEN: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8 JOLETTE 6. OBRIEN: 8, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 3 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 In the uh, in the dally ives of the Senators involved You s00 this is beyons this Clerk, | mean | don't, I deal with the Senators, (Clearing throat) I'm there to serve the Senators, Okay. Um, uh, we don't, | never deal with un, Yeah, I, PMO. | understand. The onl thing is that um, at these specific meetings, that’s why | asked you uh, previously, Yeah, that’s fine, I. ifany of them had ever, No. Um, been there o say uh, give their opinion or direction, No. Or what have you? Never, no, ‘And the fact that um, yourself and your ofice were responsible for writing these drafts, Yes tf anybody had ever called you to say, No, they have net Uh, we would ike ths. No, absolutely not. Oran email un, ‘Absolutely not What have you. Okay.10 6 20 2s G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: @. OBRIEN: 8, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: (Pause) B. JOLETTE: 32 o o ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18, ‘And there again uh, JI Anne was given as a professional uh, as our, 2s our Internal Auditor to put down uh, as she saw ituh, and, how, how, how | saw t, I backed up that. And um, so it was and, ‘and then it went to the Senators and they could amend ita, ifthey wished accordingly. The (clearing throat) last tab in this uh, email, i's dated February 18%, 2013 at 4:32 PM from Patrick ROGERS to Nigel WRIGHT, Benjamin PERRIN and Chris WOODCOCK and i's stil regarding Uh, the residency issue. And um, (clearing throat) Patrick ROGERS write, writes um, Nigel, Sandy has informed me that the ‘Senator is unavailable today regarding uh, Se-, Senator LEBRETON. Uh, the Senator would lke to let us know that she hhas assurances from the Clerk and the Law Clerk that the only way to challenge the residency of the Senator is for another Senator to do so in Chamber. Yes. Okay. Um, s0 is this correct? Yes. ‘Okay. And, did you give such assurances to Senator LEBRETON? Un, does that um, tim sure | could, Otay. 1m sure Idd, oF Chi or somebody, Okay, How, how do we, how should we do that? Well somebody could rise them in Chamber and, and, It's 10:43, document labelled number 3. (Clearing throat) This is an ‘email dated February 26”, 2013 at 11:18 AM from David \VANHEMMEN to Nigel WRIGHT, Chris WOODCOCK and Patrick ROGERS regarding, the subject is DUFFY. The entire email states, Senator TKACHUK just called, he received an email from the Clerk, Garry O'BRIEN, apologizing and stating that Senator DUFFY also charged meals per diems and that the actual amount10 20 25 30 38 G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: 6. OBRIEN: (Pause) ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN Dati 1013-09-18 ‘owed wil be in the $80 000 range, he apologized for misleading us ‘and has spoken to Chvis Mas well, unbelievable. And the next part, his response from Nigel WRIGHT saying, Marjory told me, 'm beyond furious, this wil all be paid. Um, the, that amount, the ‘second amount calculated, because I know that previously there was a smaller amount that was brought up, Yes, Uh, 30 000 I believe, $2 or what have you. The second amount that was near uh, 80 to $90 000 uh, how was that amount caloulated and by who? ‘That was calculated by Finance. Uh, um, | don't know if that Included the interest un, |, know the Law Cletk was involved in, in, Jin Ub, in kinda the formula we would use fo uh, you know, | think he checked other jurisdictions to find out what would be appropriate, the Interest prospe-, 1% I don-, wha-, whatever it was, the prime plus, Prime plus 1 ‘One percent (1%) or something tke thal. Uh, ow ult, did I yive uh, ‘an, an earlier igure? f, |, and | didn't pul it out of the air, mean | must have been checked some-, somebody um, and were we talking about just the two years or, ‘cause we went right back to the time he was appointec in ‘09 so that made a jump if t was only talking about the two years but I think uh, | think he volunteered to {90 back to'09. But hew much |, | can't recall whether uh, uh, ner, think Ihave vague notion uh, yes I did say oh, it's much more than what we had talked aout. And so, maybe | had been, | had not paid enough attention ‘cause | didn't have any documents, maybe ‘was just going ofthe top of my head of how much he had to repay but, so that figure probably is a more accurate figure without the interest payments, so. But, | mean, they can do their own math if i's uh, if he's gonna pay back a housing allowance of, of four years Uh, at 20 000 a year, Four (4) times 22. | guess it depends on how much DUFFY, was he using the max of that uh, housing allowance?6 2 2% p 3. JOLETTE: ORIEN 2° HORTON: » JOLETTE: 2 ORIEN 2 HORTON: G. OBRIEN: a JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G, OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: ° ORIEN: G. HORTON: G.OBRIEN: 6. HORTON 6. OBRIEN: 6. HORTON: 6. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: 8, JOLETTE: G. HORTON: 8. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 (Clearing throat) I's 10:46, (Inaudibie) (Laughing) Document number 4. I think there's only six. That's okay. (Laughing) Sony. Document number 4 is an email chain dated February 27", 2013 ‘and it's emails between PMO, Sorry, what date is it? Sorry, February 27", Twenty-seventh (27%), okay. Two thousand thiteer (2013) and it's emails between PMO staff regarding the draft rerort by the SENATE sub-committee. Okay. A drat epor in February? This, this is uh, not the SENATE draft eport, Okay. This is about uh, uh, havent quite figured out what hiss, (Laughing) ‘Cause it's not really part of our fle, Isa large repor, Okay. ‘And it has to do wit tits Living expenses fF, for some, “The full orginal Audit Report um, The Internal Ault Report? Yeah, | believe. Okay, could be,Fry 15 25 30 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 35 83 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 (On-, once | read this youll probably uh, youll probably know what we're talking about because um, there's specific mention about something that you would've done um, in one of the tabs. (Clearing throat) So, the, the ema that | wanna read to you is February s., 27", 2013, i's at 9:17 PM. So, | guess this was following some sort of meeting ‘cause its from Chris WOODCOCK to Nigel WRIGHT and Patrick ROGERS. ‘And who's Chris WOODCOCK, P, PC, PMO? PMO, yeah. And um, you know how | asked he-, if any PMO sta-, Uh, staffers were at any of these meetings? Yes. Um, that's wy I'm asking you this question for a third time, because um, this meeting apparently happened this evening and all ‘the information in the neeting was reported immediately. That's why 'm wondering who, who do you believe would give this information but I'l ask the question after. The sub-committee met tonight, apparently the Clerk and a Staffer who wrote the inital audit succeeded in forcing the committee, on which we have a ‘majority, to decide that the report to be issued tomorrow is just a draft but that the auditwill continue. | told CSO, who we believe Caroline STEWART CLSEN, uh, this uh, uh, | told Caroline STEWART OLSEN this is out of the question. Apparently the Clerk and Staffer threatenec legal action ifthe ful original audit report was not released. Ou members felt the Staffer would leak the report. They're to mest again at 8 AM, calling TKACHUK now. (Sighing) What does that um, bring your memory back to? (Laughing) Oh yes. Vill, don't know how this gentioman got that buts, as said um, before Ciistmas, Intemal Economy agroed to ask forthe markers to show residency, divers licence, al hat stuff ‘and they said there wil be an intemal auton ree, on housing allowances. And the SENATE Administration would do tis intemal uit, Jill Anno whois our Internal Auditor Director, of course thats her job, she starte, se di, she did an analysis and an audits to be independent and uh, her best perspective on the problem and how to fix the problem, yal yad ya. Um, this, a8 | said in my ‘opening statement, wes a matter of great coniroversy between me10 8 2s 30 35 G. OBRIEN: 36 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 land the Steering Committee. And we had a big blow out um, here ‘uh, and this is when | wanted the whole thing tuned over to MARSHALL’s sub-committee. I felt that the au-, because they were, they were uh, |, | don't know what, maybe I could look at that ‘email. Um, he sald something to the effect uh, that succeeded in forcing the committee to decide the report to be issued tomorrow, is just a draft, but the ausit will continue, Well, we had, we had different discussions on that. One was uh, because again somebody had said this t, Interal Audit Report would be made public. And that was never uh, the intention of the administration to make it publi, it was a reported, an Internal Audit Report to the committee. Um, so we were up against that media commitment to make I public and that's what was very uh, I think this was uh, troubling uh, the members of Steering. But um, uh, so they wanted to just uh, s-, squash it completely and uh, again I felt this was not uh, this was not right. There were great ideas in this report, this was an audit report. And again | felt that they were not ‘acting properly as an aucit sub-committee, an audit sub-committee, they were looking at more things from uh, Public Relations viewpoint. And um, uh, they wanted to, | think the gist oft was they wanted to write their own audit re-, wanted to write their own ‘audit report, Ub, and of course only auditors, certified auditors write auait reports. | mean you can't portray it as an audit report when it's written by STEWART OLSEN or somebody for, or somebody in TKACHUK's office or uh, uh, they wanted to urn, somehow portray to psople that this was an Internal Audit Report and its n-, was never cause they're, they weren't properly certified to write it as an audit report. Jil Anne had received advice from ERNST YOUNG whois uh, who is our Advisor on the audit, we had, TKACHUK had agreed that if Jill Anne ever runs into trouble when she was doing tie audit, feel free to talk to ERNST YOUNG ‘who was under contract with us to do intemal audits. Uh, and J, and ERNST YOUNG had given Jil Anne uh, advice that if ever, a5 professionals, if if Storing reloased this other thing that they were gonna write as uh, and callit an audit, they could be sued. And all il Anne was, was pressed was to push,.. (Unknown person coughing) G. OBRIEN: ‘To pull to uh, convey that message and | conveyed it very clearly ‘as wall thet uh, this isnot an audit report, there's a terrible10 Fry 20 30 35 G. HORTON’ G. OBRIEN: 37 [STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 85 DATE: 2013-09-18 confusion, youre talking about something completely different, you're an audit sub-committee that can issue a report but don't call itan audit re-, an audi, i's not an audit, only auditors do audit, audits. So this brougtt great tension between me and uh, and Steering and we had this big meeting here and I had it out with them completely. What we agreed to was that the um, that the report would nat be reeased. Uh, but it would, the audit would continue but deep in the background the audit would continue, it would not be reported ta Internal Economy. We agreed that Inte-, Uh, Inte-, uh, Audit Sub-Committee can make a report to Internal Economy but they are not fo call it an audit, and they agreed to that. Unfortunately, sf in the media it gota lite twisted but not nearly the extent that this was an aust, at all. And all this report was (clearing throat) was that uh, we had asked for uh, the markers of the health card and allthis kind of business and that X amount of ‘Senators had uh, had, had uh, fulfilled all of the uh, all ofthe criteria and this is what, this is the next steps we were doing. And uh, 50, that, that report was tebled in the SENATE, its a public report, was not called an ausit, it was called a Report of Internal Economy and Itcame from the Audit Sub-Committee but it was not an aut. Jil ‘Anne's Internal Audit Report or Internal Audit would continue, so. Um, were people unhappy about that? Well, uh, intre-, the, Jil ‘Anne's Internal Audit Report has never, has never seen the light of day, ithas never been publicly released. It was put on kinda hold, it was not killed, itwas rot, twas just kinda put in limbo and uh, 1 was okay wit that because it kept the integrty of the process. But ‘um, um, uh, s+, and, and there was no uh, and, and you know, the uh, the issues, eventually DELOITTE took over a lot of these issues, land, and uh, and uh, made comments on it. And in fact w, from that this other report, his Travel Policy amendments that we made ‘on May the 9” in addition to the three DELOITTE audits that we tabled, we tabled a report on amending the Travel Policy, most of those ideas came from Jill Anne’s internal Audit Report. So, it it did have value, to meithad tremendous value. And it was reflected and adopted by the SENATE going forward, these are the changes we wanna make. So e, eventually they came around to the ideas of that report. ‘The reference to the Clerk and the Staff or the Staffer is Jil Anne? Yes.10 15 20 2s 30 G. HORTON: (Pause) G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: 38 86 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 6 DATE: 2013-00-18 Okay. Now, the, our members felt the Staffer would leak the report, it was never leaked, that was bullshit (Clearing throat) (Pause) It's 10:56, its document labelled number 5, (Pause) I's an errail chain dated March 1%, 2013, March 1%, okay. ‘And i's a discussion between Nigel WRIGHT and Senator ‘STEWART OLSEN. Okay. (Clearing throat) The email part that I will uh, read to you is from lum, Senator STEWART OLSEN to Nigel WRIGHT and it's regarding, it's, the tite ofthe, the email is uh, response to the ‘SENATE report. Confdentially both Marge and David are telling teach other the audit will not be poled. I believe I can work with Dave, but he does work Marge, but he does work Marge up. | am Not certain if itis @ feeing that they are independent or just not sed to working together. | think the only way to do this is to tll DELOITTE that we are satisfied with the repayment and end the audit, ‘The nonpartisan nature of the committee is a problem as is the Clerk who seems o have his own agenda, mind you itis a good agenda, he wants to cean up the place. In falmess, Chris did talk to me about revisions but sald he was talking to Dave so | loft Checked with Dave later to see if they had spoken and was he okay with revisions and he said yes. | don't envy your job, as | said though if| had known tom the start where we needed to finish a prob could have been managed. (Pause) Why don't you have a look and, the fist question, you can think about it as you read that part, is what is meant by Senator STEWART OLSEN's comments, ‘about you uh, whal uh what's your agenda? She s-, she alludes ‘through it that i's, youwanna clean up the place and uh, in ‘answering that question is what do you think Senetor STEWART OLSEN's agenda is? ‘Cause obviously, (Laughing) It's not the same as yours, doesn't appear to be the same as yours. Sony10 as 20 a G. O'BRIEN: (Pause) B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 39 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 {(Sighing) (Pause) Well uh, uh, | guess this is coming on the heels of that other email uh, that I, raised such an objection of wanting tokill the internal aud, and is that, you know, { wasn't gonna go ‘along with them. |, | know I'm their uh, servant but on the other hand | have a professional obligation with respect to stewardship of public funds and um, appropriateness of procedures and all ofthat business, So uh, my agenda and, and you know uh, | appreciate she said is a good agenda and that exactly pinpoints the reason why [fet that that kind of comment should not be coming from a member of the Audit Sub-Committee, which is also to have the same agenda as me (laughing) of wanting to clean up the place, that’s way you have an audit sub-comit, i's why is appointed in the first place. So | didnt think itwas appropriate for her to uh, to be 80 p-, p-, politic, you know, partis-, no I don't want to say partisan but protective of the SENATE and protective of ‘communications and um, uh, ws, we wanted to uh, we wanted to improve the place. So, um, n-, uh, now I got to say that I think, and this is just my opinion, that she's made a complete 100% turnaround, that Senator STEWART OLSEN has been very supportive of me as we, as we got out of allthis problem and she's, um, was supportive of the Auditor General coming in here, she told me If I. she says Im finally sleeping well, that the Auditor General was in, we're gonna look at these problems. So, 'm, fm very pleased with her support uh, uh, of going forward but at this point in time I was very, and I, and I had it out with her right here, | felt that she just was not acting properiy as an audit sub-committee ‘member, with you know, some of the things she was saying. So, that's, that's how | would interpret this. Now she not ac-,a-, ch, accusing me of any partisanship, ! don't think so. She want, he wants to clean up the place, | don't think that’s a partisan issue at all (Clearing throat) Its 11:01, its the final document, Yeah. Its labelled document number 8, There are three parts here that Ii make reference to, ard i's a uh, email chain dated Apri 20" to April 23°, April now? Okay.10 1s 0 2s 30 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 40 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 Yes, Okay. Uh, 2013. And uh, this is the only one out ofthe whole gang that ve shown you where you're actually part of the e-, email chain. ‘And i's regarding um, a request from DELOITTE to speak to Senator DUFFY and subsequent PMO discussions on this whole matter. (Clearing throat) ‘Arequest from PMO to speak uh.. No, a request from DELOITTE DELONTE, To speak to Senator CUFFY regarding their uct Okay. ‘And then their subsequent PMO discussions regarding that, Okay, kay, Initial. So the fist, the frst email ofthis chain is from Gary TIMM, from DELONTE, Okay. Uh, addressed to uh, sll Anne Joseph, Okay. ‘And there's other people that are uh, another person that Is carbon ‘copied and i's um, it says good afternoon Jill Anne, | received an ‘email this moming from Counsel for Senator O wherein Counsel provided a copy of a lettor dated April 18%, 2013 from Senator DUFFY to Senator TKACHUK regarding an informal conversation they had on the evening of Tuesday April 16, 2013. In the later Senator DUFFY states, if you feel it helpful! will be happy to appear before your committee or sub-committee or auditors from DELOITTE to respondto the questions on this or questions about my residency in PEI. Um, given this communication we believe that ‘we should be meeting with Senator DUFFY and also be requesting that he provide the documentation requested previously to be ‘consistent with the other Senators under review. We would Undertake this meeting as soon as Senator DUFFY's available,0 2s 30 35 G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: a STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN G DATE: 2013-09-18 however it would have an impact on our report timing. We looked to your and the SENATE sub-committee’s direction, regards, Gary TTIMM. So, the next response emails from Jill Anne JOSEPH back to Gary TIMM and you'r, you are carbon copied in this email where it says Good afternoon Gary, thank you for your, this information, will consult with the Cerk of the SENATE, Gary O'BRIEN who in {urn will consult wil the Chair of Internal Ecomonomy(ph) Senator David TKACHUK on this matter. 1 agree that a meeting and the p-, Uh, provision of requested documentation wil further assist your review of Senator DUFFY’s claims and will provide more consistency with the cther Senators’ under review. As a report stand-alone a short delay for this one may be acceptable, Um, the next emails from yourself, Gary O'BRIEN, to uh, David TKACHUK ‘and carbon copied to Jil Anne JOSEPH and it says hi Senator, as per DELOITTE's emai and sil Anne, do you advise or encourage that Senator DUFFY meet with DELOITTE and provide the documentation requested? Thanks. ‘Yeah, 'm aware of those, yeah. (Okay. Um, my question is um, i's not included in this email chain, do you remember whet Senator TKACHUK's response was regarding this? (Okay | think |, yeah Senator, so | (pause) | know, | guess 'd, well did email him, but | phoned him as well | phoned him about this {and uh, he said let me think about it, And then he got back on Monday and uh, (clearing throat) he, | think the r, reason the, the, Steering was gonna rreet Tuesday and | think he said we're gonna bring it to Steering’s aitention. It was brought the next day and the answer was no. DUFFY had had plenty oft, it was gonna delay the audit and that was, they were up against this timeline, they felt May 9" was lke the end of the world, everything had to be done by May the 9". And so us, um, the, itwas the full agreement of Steering including Senator FUREY that uh, that uh, that the audit not be delayed and DELOITTE should be told that, that DUFFY had plenty of time to meet with them and he chose not to. And uh, it's iit just ran the risk of delaying the audit. Now Jil just uh, was ch-, ‘Anne was only expressing her view (clearing throat) the fact it ‘would be a good thing for the audit DUFFY was uh, was interviewed but she had no uh, you know, she was not looking at it from uh, whatever reason it what decided that there was no, there10 20 20 B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: 8 JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B.JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 42 [STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘was no, that date was gonna be honoured, that we were tabling the reports in the Chamber on May the 8 and uh, that was itso, DELOITTE was told that ‘Okay. The, do you believe that Senator DUFFY uh, cooperating with DELOITTE and providing them in-, information and documents would've helped? Yes. (Okay. Um, was this um, what was more important than the um, maintaining the May 9" date or uh, Wel. Providing all the information? ‘That was beyond, well what was more important? | ca-, | can't uh, | mean that's not my call that they, Hm. They make the calls, Dat that. ‘Theyre made, ‘That's what they decided? They, ‘That's what they decided, and it wasn't just one per-, it wasn't just cone side, itwas the other side too. And it was all the audits together, all of it one way, get this agen-, you know and as you know, they went out and said the case is closed, i's over. So uh, | obviously, it was, that as (clearing throat) a political decision, that's a political decision. So, Did yourself or Jill Anne JOSEPH or anybody from your office ‘communicate with Serator DUFFY regarding this to see if he was available? No. Uh, no. No, he's dealing with DELOITTE or through his lawyers. ‘Kay.10 8 20 2s 30 G. OBRIEN: M. PATRICE: G. O'BRIEN: M. PATRICE: G. O'BRIEN: M, PATRICE: G. OBRIEN: 6B. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 43 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 I don't know. No, no we uh, sory, we, we did send uh, | cant remember there was some kind of communication to DUFFY, ‘The location ofthe meeting | beliove. ‘The resolution ofthe meeting? The De-, the motion? Nov. Yeah Nol, notin relation tothe, No, that he uh, well was something that the audit would not gonna be delayed, that was i Okay. Whether he was, you see on I, | did not tak to DUFFY and Jil Anne id not talk to DUFFY. You'te pretty much answering the last question I had for you. It ‘was um, following these messages uh, um, these a-, original ones were on the 20" and uh, three days later um, this is stil on the ‘same email chain, i's from Chris MONTGOMERY who's writing to uh, Nigel WRIGHT, Patrick ROGERS, Chris WOODCOCK uh, Marjory LEBRETON and uh, it indicates I'm looping in the Minister |, Tm told that Steering decided today to send a letter to DUFFY Indicating that the auct was concluded and he will therefore not have an opportunity to meet with auditors. So, um, wy | guess there was, yes. M’kay, so, my last question, were you aware of this course of action, and you already enswered that yes you. Yes, yes, You were aware Yes. (Okay. (Pause) Um, earlier when you were giving your initial um, timeline, chronologicaly you had indicated that um, TKACHUK would've asked to meet with uh, DELOITTE.. Yes. @ be25 B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 44 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN so nO DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘And that Gary TIMM and somebody came here and you were here inthis office. And um, Senator TKACHUK would've asked uh, Gary IMM, what would happen if DUFFY did not cooperate, He did So that's why Im going back to this uh, (Inaudible) Last part and this c, Yos What are thoughts about that? Well that was well before this thing at, atthe last minute on April 22° or whatever it was, Yes | don’t know when the other meeting (inaudible) find that date but, um, um, ‘cause DUFFY had not cooperated uh, I, don't know why Senator TKACHUK wanted fo ask that question of DELOITTE, | uss we knew he was not cooperating, DELOITTE had tol ue that, they never heard rom, the others had coopers, BRAZ- HAR® had been down (laughing) many times, he was bugging them. Uh, uh, and HAR-, and BRAZEAU, they had requested information, he had provided fort s0 uh, but DUFFY had done nothing. Un, and uh, and uh, uh, and I guess uh, DUFFY had already indicated he was not (inaudible) uh, gonna repay, whether that was his ralionalle fr not cooperating, | don't know, But um, he Uh, so I, was asked to attend the meeting I, | uh, attend the meeting, | sett up, we set it up for DELOITTE to come here and th, he asked that question, so. Um, Jil Anne JOSEPH was um, the Clerk for Senator MARSHALL's, Yes. ‘Sub-committee, for uh BRAZEAU and uh, HARB, Yes, yes.10 1s 2 28 20 35 B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIE 8, JOLETTE: G. OBRIE 8, JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 45 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 Um, were you privy toa, to any information uh, coming out of un, the meetings of uh, those ub, that sub-committee or ha-, did you ever attend any of the meetings? No, I never attended um, uh, Senator MARSHALL really wanted to keep that whole thing confidential and uh, sof, | did not get ‘anything really from where they were going. Uh, | th, 1do know though that un, when we started to discuss the writing of the draft report with Jill Anne that um, she wanted to, to ensure thatthe style of the three reports were pretty much the same way. Sol guess I knew what the conclusions were gonna, welt | don't know, I guess | didn't know what the conclusions were of, of uh, of HARB and BRAZEAU. Un, but uh, that was basically what ha-, what was going on. |, | didn't krow too much about that ‘Yeah. The um, back to my PMO questions of f, where meetings ‘were hold uh, where we've spoken to numerous people uh, who have stated that during the uh, these meetings with the various Senators and s-, PMO staff that there was also SENATE transcription um, staffthat attended. Um, would these people be ‘associated to y-, your office? Or is this com, completely separate? ‘The transcription? Yeah ‘Yeah, they're on, theyre on part ofthe, the SENATE debates, they're our Hansard reporters, Okay. So they work in a division that comes under me. ‘Okay. Uh, | know thal you said you've never been to a meeting Where PMO was, was uh, um, was there, however did yo-, were you ever aware of any m-, any of these meetings during this time or 1, when these uh, when uh, the draft report and final report were being prepared, wore you aware of anybody, any, anybody that associated, | guess, wth your uh, with your office attending these meetings? No. ‘Okay. I'm sure youre, you're gonna ask this question but Im thinking about it right now, 8 PB ee ° HORTON: ORIEN HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: OBRIEN: HORTON: O'BRIEN: . HORTON: - O'BRIEN: HORTON: OBRIEN: HORTON: OBRIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: ORIEN: HORTON: ORIEN HORTON: OBRIEN: 51 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 and this was, this was actually the last meeting of the sub: committee on that issue, Okay s0 tha, that meeting ends? We... ‘Ar, around 4:16 ish, Yeah TKACHUK comes to your offic, right? Yes, he does. (Okay. And we know what happened there and then at 17, ‘And, and then un-, unfortunately though he, itwas just he and |. If had to do my druthers.! would have had Lucie come in, she was doing all the typing on allthis kind of stuff, so uh, uh, sh, she ‘would've si, you know witnessed what was going on (laughing), Okay. But it was just he and And then at 17:20 there's another meeting? Correct. (Okay. And that's uh, uh, is that, that a Steering or Standing Committee? That's the ful committee, yeah Standing committee. ‘Yes somy, the Standing Committee. ‘And then, then we got May 9", we're gonna have the entire committee meeting again is, its a Standing, Yes, Committee meeting again, Yes. What ime is that, 9? Yes. Its 9 o'ciock,20 as 2s 0 G. HORTON: G. O'BRIEN: G. HORTON’ G. O'BRIEN: G. HORTON: G. O'BRIEN: ° HORTON: o O'BRIEN: G. HORTON: 8. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: 8. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: 8. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: 8 JOLETTE: 6. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: 52 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 14 DATE: 2013-09-18 Nine (9) o'clock. Nine (9) AM, might have been 8:30, | can't remember, yeah. {At this meeting uh, isis it that meeting thatthe, it's the, the, the, the report is produced and there's another one minor change, Carolyn STEWART OLSEN, Yes, that's the uh, it was produced the night before, but we didn’t get toi Right, right, right So, but we did focus entirely, well, th-, the first part of the meeting, fon the DUFFY report but before we did that DELOITTE made one final presentation, took some questions and then they left. Uh is, DUFFY was there, ! think DUFFY left, when DELOITTE left DUFFY left and then we focused on it, a-, adopting this report of the audit sub-committee, STEWART OLSEN moved an amendment that was, and, and that was an amendment and uh, it was agreed to ‘and it was ordered to be reported. Perfect ‘Complicated, | know, thank you That's allt have, (Clearing throat) think He. ‘Oh, no it's not faughing). let me just contnue and, Go ahead. ‘And Huh shut up Yeah Un, at some point, through the investigation we know that TKACHUK made an affer to DUFFY, if you pay back the money well stop the audit, are you aware of that?6 20 as 20 G. OBRIEN: G, HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. O'BRIEN: G. HORTON: B, JOLETTE: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: @. OBRIEN 8. JOLETTE G. OBRIEN: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G, OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 53, 40% ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN . DATE: 2013-09-18 No. . Um, and another point there was an agreement that um, the uh, Senator GERSTEIN had agreed that the Conservative Fund would pay back the money for DUFFY when it was around $32 000, are you aware of that? No. ‘Also, on top of the money being pack-, paid back by Nigel WRIGHT ‘um, the $90 000, the Conservative Fund agreed to pay back the legal fees from Senator DUFFY, if, are you aware th-, of any of that? No. Those are my questions. Mr. O'BRIEN, uh, uh, you stated earlier that when uh, there was. ‘meetings of uh, Internal Economy and Steering that you'd be present. Yes. Um, would there be non-official meetings between uh, the Senators Involved in the, in these committee, Mi, Where you would nat 2¢? Might have been. Okay. ‘The reason I'm saying is that on May 7" um, we've spoken to a ‘Senator who's advised that on May 7 there was a meeting um, whore the reports wer discussed and uh, there was a lot of pressure on geting them done, Okay. ‘And it was tke the go ime, and that Nigel WRIGHT and Chris WOODCOCK and other PMO staff were al this meeting with the other Senators, C-, could have been, ‘And s+, and that's why I'm just wondering if, i,10 6 20 2s 20 G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. O'BRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 54 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 168 DATE: 2013-09-18 Yeah, IWitwas normal practice f, to have these meetings without the Cletk of the committee? Normal practice, { don't know iis normal uh, a8 I said they're pollicians, they meet. That was a confidential report, 'm surprised it was shared so widely if, because they're, you know this is protected by Parliamentary privilege, to be no leaks, yadi yadl ya, Yeah So, this was um, Because |, This is not pro-, I don' think this was Uh, uh, this is uh, uh J it shouldn't, they should protect the confidentiality ofthese reports, yes. Because at this specife uh, at this meeting on the 7" when uh, Nigel WRIGHT and other PMO staff were present um, ike | seid, the reports were discussed and uh, um, there were multiple Senators in attendance and uh, that's that's just my question again, i, Right, ! was never at, at that, at Yeah, Any kind of meeting lke that. Yeah. And um, my question is uh, why would be, they be hoiding, why do you think they'd be holding these meetings without the ful, guess uh, No, Ensemble? Uh, uh, they're kinda calling us almost lke a caucus, they're ccaucusing on, on their position on these reports, | mean this, this happens in the politcal institutions, is a party institution. Um, so you know, something tke that i's not un-, I would say it's not Unusual, 'm surprisec though they, but uh, maybe that happens. 1 «uh, i's beyond me uh, because that’s into the party realm uh,20 8 » 30 B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: 8, JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN 8. JOLETTE: 6. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 55 ‘STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18 ‘and uh, but tis a con., in, in th, th, theory is a confidential report of the sub-committee. (Clearing throat) The um, the report, we've leamed through the Investigation, has made it, it, it had made it way, its way to the PMO, to their office and uh, | guess revisions uh, urn, what they wanted to, to have writen in the report uh, was uh, was done and then uh, transferred back here we imagine um, by verbal means. Um, s0 did you at any point release this uh, document to anybody at, at PMO in any format, No. Paper, electronic? No, no, no, no. Okay. Who would get the, a copy of it? Would, would it be ‘electronic, frst ofall, cr just paper? Wou-, would have been electronic. Okay. And who woule get a, who would have access to the clectronie version of thoce drafte? Well | think uh, d-,itwould be on a normal distibution ist of uh, of ‘our Steering Committee. Uh, so it would have included um, you know, uh, uh, TKACHUK and his Assistant... Ub-hm. Most likely, and um, STEWART OLSEN and her Assistant and uh, and Senator FUREY and his Assistant. But it would not have gone to Mar., to Senator LEBRETON uh, it would not have gone to COWAN, Senator COWAN. Uh, so i's just the members of the sub-committee but, but normally their Assistants, Yeah. | don't know to what extent staf | don't think we would've circulated to all, you know, the &, people and | p-, most ikely, you know, to key people on the staf would have had a copy as well, But it would have gone electronical fist, yes, And Uh. ‘And then a paper cops? (Talking at the same time)10 15 20 20 G. OBRIEN: 8. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: G. HORTON: B. JOLETTE: G. HORTON: G. OBRIEN: B. JOLETTE: 86 STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN 104 DATE: 2013-09-48 (Inaudible) The paper copy uh, ws, at this point | think we were tying to transfer all decuments electronically, but fa Senator ‘wanted a paper copy we would provide it. But uh, and, and probably at the meeting of the Tuesday we would have, ‘cause they ‘would have been working on paper copies to make changes. So there would have been paper copies provided at the meeting. “Kay (clearing throat). Does uh, somebody from uh, Senator LEBRETON's office um, getting a han-. getting their hands on a paper uh, copy of this, it simply just be asking one of the pre-, people who was privy to the information, Yes, one of the Senators, yes. Yeah, So it wouldn't have come from us to Chris MONTGOMERY. Okay. ''m pretty sure, no. Its alll have fF, That's good Time is uh, 11:28. ‘Thank you Mr. O'BRIEN. ‘Thank you very much, (Oh, we should have asked you, do you have anything w-, you wanna add? No, no (laughing) (Laughing) Nothing toads, anything to change? | aways forget that pa aughing). Two (2) hour think ve said enough here uh, (Okay, thank you.[STATEMENT OF Gary O'BRIEN DATE: 2013-09-18, Glossary: - : Word not complete ‘Sentence cut off or not finished (ph): Phonetic Transenber: CR Proofreader: LG Revised: Laurent Léger 2013-10-22 87 10TAB C10 6 20] 2s ‘This 's Exhibit Affidavit of Att? ‘Swom before me, this day of a. Pad Court File No, 14-30299 106 ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN MICHAEL DUFFY EXCERPT OF BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C. VATLLANCOURT on April 27, 2015, at OTTAWA, Ontario APPEARANCES M. Holmes &§ J. Neubauer Counsel for the Crown D. Bayne & J. Doody Counsel for the Accused10 6 167 a Table of Contents ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No Proceedings 1 Certificate of Transcript 8 WITNESSES WITNESSES Examination Cross- Re- —— thief Examination | Examination EXHIBITS EXHIBIT NUMBER ENTERED ON PAGE 28 - Organization Chart of the Senate Administration 4 Transcript Ordered: April 30, 2015 Transcript Completed: April 30, 2015 ordering Party Notified: April 30, 201510 6 Ea 25 0 168 R. v. M. Duffy Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. MONDAY, APRIL 27°, 2015 (2:21 p.m.) NICOLE PROULX: PREVIOUSLY SWORN CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BAYNE (continued Q. Now, if you turn to the last document under Tab 3, it’s four pages in from the end. It’s not the last one, because the last one is 2015-16, and I’m going to come to that. But the one that is immediately after the time period that His Honour’s concerned with, 2009 through 2012, it's the form of declaration that covers the period April 1, 2013, to March 31, 2014. You see that? A. Yes, I do. Q. And I believe that also appears under Tab 6 of Exhibit 1 on the second page. That time period appears there as well? Now, this form still makes reference to the 22" Report of 1998 for the purzose of designating the primary residence, right? A. Yes. Q. But, further cown, you can see on the form, it adds, for the first time, and this is after the claims that are before the Court: “For the purpose of the 19% Report of the Senate Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration presented in the Senate on February 28, 2013[...]” Then it’s got a box that says “I agree that the documents provided to the Senate Internal Audit in the context of the review of primary and secondary residences be forwarded to the Finance and Procurement Directorate or I am providing the following documents: a) a copy of my driver’s license.” Not “A,” a box for that. Another box: “A copy of my heath card.” Another box: “A correct? copy of a relevant page of my income tax form,10 6 25 ao 2 108 R. v. M. Duffy Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. A. Correct. Q. These requirements did not appear on all the prior designations that we’ve looked at... A. No. Qe correct? A. Correct. Q. And they are all - they are effective on the April 1, 2013, form, aren’t they? They affect that declaration form... Me stp Q. ...but not the preceding ones? A. Exactly? the report was approved in February 2013, so it only came into effect at that time. Q. And now, for the first time, but after the fact of Senator Duffy's questioned designations, do we see a criterion made explicit about providing documents like a driver's license, health card, and/or income tax return form, correct? A. Correct. Q. And what - in the box above those, I wonder if you could help me? Tell His Honour what the Senate Internal Audit in the context of the review of primary and secondary residences was? A. The Senate Internal Audit - there was - well, as it said, there was a review of primary and secondary residences done by the Senate Internal Audit. Q. Who would that be? Jill Ann Joseph? A. Yes. Q. Jill Ann Joseph? and would you tell His Honour who Jill Ann Joseph was? A. At the time, she was the director of Internal Audit and Strategic Planning.10 6 2s 30 a 116 R. v. M. Duffy Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. Q. Okay. So, if we could back to Exhibit 27, is there anywhere on Exhibit 27 you could locate her? And maybe I/11 show you another - first I/11 ask you that, on 27, A, The org chart you’re showing me is 2008. Q. Yes? A, She was not in that position at that time. Q. Okay. I’m going to find you another org chart. And this is page seven of the 2012 Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the Standing Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration, “Administration of the Senate of Canada,” report of the Auditor General. It’s Exhibit 2 to the Auditor General's report. And I’m going to ask you if that’s any better help as being more current. A. It is. There’s no name on it, but Jill Ann — the director, Internal Audit, Director of Strategic Planning, was Jill Ann. It would have been... Q. Okay. A. ...in that box. @. Is that otherwise an accurate depiction, then, of Senate Administration as of the time of the Auditor General's report? A. As of that time, yes, it would have to be. Q. Okay. MR. BAYNE: And, Your Honour, I/11 ask that this be made the next exhibit. I don’t have multiple copies, although 1/11 have them made. But the witness has identified it and located the position of the Director of Internal Audit, which is, at least on this form, at the same level as the Clerk of the Senate.0 6 2 4a. R. v. M. Duffy Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. MS. PROULX: It reports - yes, it’s reports [sic] to the Clerk of the Senate functionally, and to the audits of committee. MR. BAYNE: Okay. Madam Clerk... THE COURT: Which exhibit are we at? 28? COURT CLERK: Yes, that’s correct. THE COURT: Exhibit 28. EXHIBIT NUMBER 28: Organization Chart of the Senate Administration - produced and marked. MR. BAYNE: Q. I’m sorry, I interrupted your answer. You were telling us that Jill Ann Joseph, the internal audit director. A. Yes. Q. ...did a report, did she? A. There was & review. I’m just - let me read back: “The Review of Primary and Secondary Residences.” That was conducted by the internal audit, so that would have been Jill ann Joseph. Q. And that report recommended changes? A. Iwas not part of that report MR. HOLMES: Your Honour. A. ...what hap. MR. HOLMES: I’m sorry to rise at this point. I know that there’s a lawyer here representing the interests of the Senate, and I wonder if we could take a break for just a moment? I just wanted to clarify something with the lawyer representing the Senate. It involves information that we had received previously about a possible assertion of a parliamentary privilege. It’s not our privilege to assert, but I just wanted to confirm with her what the at10 6 | 25 30 UPON RE 5. i R. v. W. Duffy Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. be status of that is. And itll just take five minutes just to have a brief conversation with her. THE COURT: All right. We/ll take a short recess. MR. HOLMES: Thank you. RECESS SUMIN MR. HOLME! Thank you for the time, Your Honour. First of all, I need to correct a misstatement that I made. Ms. London-Weinstein is not a lawyer for the Senate. She's a lawyer for the employees of the Senate; so, Mr. Audeent, Mr. Proulx, Ms. Makhlouf, so far. And with respect to the other issue, I don’t have the same degree of knowledge that my friend, Ms. London-Weinstein has. And if the Court would be agreeable to allowing her to speak on this, perhaps she could outline what the nature of the issue is, although she has a more peripheral involvement in that, as T understand. MS. LONDON-WEINSTEIN: Good afternoon, Your Konour. THE COURT: Afternoon. MS. LONDON-WEINSTEIN: London-Weinstein, initial “A,” for the record. and my understanding is that - and as Mr. Holmes correctly stated, T am counsel for some of the Senate employees. I am not counsel for the10 6 Ea 2s R. v. H. Duffy Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. Senate. They have separate counsel. But I am counsel for Jill Ann Joseph, who may or may not be testifying in this matter. The contents of the report, it’s my understanding, that there is a claim of privilege that is being asserted over the contents of this report. And my understanding as well is that Mr. Bayne was notified that privilege was being asserted by counsel from Gowlings. And I was asked that if the issue arose, that counsel from Gowlings would like to attend and to make submissions on the issue if the report were going to be delved into, even collaterally, through other witnesses. So, I just wanted to relay that to the Court. It’s not my area, but there is counsel on board who have spoken to Mr. Bayne about it, and the Crown has been advised as well. THE COURT: All right... MS. LONDON-WEINSTEIN: Thank you. THE COURT: ...thank you for that information. MR. BAYNE: Your Honour, I don’t intend to try and adduce the report. What I intend to seek to do with the witness - and my friend is right, when I asked for production of that report from the woman who was the woman charged to do the internal audit and report on the state of these rules, I was told the Senate would not release it, that they’re claiming privilege over it. I am not prepared, at this point, to deflect the Court’s attention into a discussion of parliamentary privilege and so on0 6 20 2 0 2 R. v. M. Duffy Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. and so forth. Whet I do intend to ask this witness, however, if I’m permitted, is - much as was done with the Deloitte Report, KPMG, the Auditor General, it would be shocking to me that this witness would not be familiar with and have a response to whatever it was that Jill Ann Joseph reported, and that therefore it’s her response and not the truth of the contents of whatever the report stated, but simply the narrative fact that there was a report and there were changes made afterwards and whether she agreed with the findings of the report, whatever they were. THE COURT: Yeah, if the questions are put in that general sense, that’s one thing, as long as there’s no details being sought. So, that’s a very - very general question. MR. HOLMES: Okay, but here’s the difficulty: the lawyer who actually wants to assert the privilege isn’t here in court right now, and I don’t - I mean, without knowing more than what Mr. Bayne just said - but to ask about the familiarity with the report and the steps taken in response would have to reveal what the contents of the report actually would be. There’s just. THE COURT: Well... MR. HOLMES: That's unavoidable. THE COURT: Well, then that dialogue can be held between that counsel and Mr. Bayne. And perhaps they can come to an agreement or they can argue the point.6 20 2 0 G6 R. v. M. Duffy i Nicole Proulx - Cr-Ex. Me o MR. HOLME: Okay, but the privilege will be exhausted and blown if Mr. Bayne is permitted to proceed. THE COURT: No, we aren’t going to go there right then. MR. HOLMES: Okay. THE COURT: Right now... MR. HOLMES: That’s fine. THE COURT: ...then, We will leave that MR. BAYNE: So, if I understand correctly, I am to leave that area? THE COURT: Correct. Now, we need our witness.TAB DThis is Exhibit .. Affidavit of ‘Swom before me, day Of ......A%, SENATE Hon. Michael Duffy Lion. Michael Duffy TION bi 'S FINANGES 15 May 2013 ESEN Jill Anne Joseph, CIA, CGAP Director Internal Audit and Strategic Planning Room 146-N Centre Block BS SEN AT The Senate of Canada, Ottawa, ON KIA 0A4 Y OD IMG Dear Ms. Joseph: | am writing in response to your recent letter. There have been some changes since my last letter to you on this issue, which was dated Dec. 13, 2012. Please find enclosed; © Acopy of my PEI driver’s licence, Re: PEI income tax. | have retained an accountant in Charlottetown, and he will file my 2013 taxes in PEI. * In December | enclosed a letter from Health PEI acknowledging my application for a PEI health care card. | am tracking my time on PEIto meet their qualifications, and expect to receive the PEI Health card later this year. ‘© Lam registered with Elections Canada to vote in PE | believe you have photos of my PEI residence in your files. | trust this answers your questions. Yours truly, HAA. Nifke Senatorrates when conleed y tha : ee DECTARSTION OF PRIMIARY AND SECONDARY RESIDENCES ‘Senators Living Expenses ste Neon Capital Reon NCR Period covered from April ("2013 t Mareh 31° 2011 PRIMARY RESIDENCE Per | ~—rLh—r —rC =r ‘dmmarion oped i tn Sms on ae 18190 hates PD Tess nthe rouse ao, Toe ‘Se a app teflon same (OPA cork We | on chau te Oe trie be rntcnae ole (MO rte peyote Nintenh Report ofthe Sing Sane Commuter om trl ana, ges lbmanioen, ested he Sea on Feu) 28.201) nace se documents proved the Sua Ina A the contest othe reve of rier i soa) ‘asda be fore the ince nd Preemet Dissorse ‘gars eon oss DReonotmarvers teem CY Avopyotiny ahead C) coy oft lew page agen ‘SECONDARY RESIDENCE IN THE NCR (ee tet oy by senatrs whee primary reece Is more thn {tomers fom Perlement Hil) ‘AL_Clidonat own or reat scones residence ithe NCR B. \ Senaor whe gua a secondary residene inthe NCR wit be reimbursed Mat rat, dsternne by the Siding Camitar fon! Sconomy. Badges ad Adninizraon, Tor each ay sch Tle 1 [Nitin for the Senator's occupancy, ad proving hat ariag such ne 5 ol rentd Te aneier Person ‘Gr hamed um enpene by svotbr Senator Tae olieg coisas App" Fonts ae camper for asoramedton aon ede for that deci. a The Somor wus satan a copy of the mana x ste 5 100 of Oey ow 9 Seay bess Cheyst utc merase sal Town a server esiene in he NCF ae matt rove sondans 1s Senator who sas or en acommodaton fa the NCR wil be eeimburned ax fog am fons for ‘monthly css rein avaiable or ths purpose. The ie codons ap eye Senter tai copy af ene scent pt ayer Lense eth {Thelen Tay bras lint the Se rere es fmcsng no the Ieee i ot father Be pes ines of the Seta es tho of bs oF be “Timi member and + Ro Senor or ir er “any aera ove tert a presp a pris eovpratia that is 3 fry tose und whch patty compart eee Be ‘eat 11 eat secondary rsherc in he NCR ae mec the bose eoeion, seon £7 Wokeoe Torece ae cm OCHO mice BD rasmced RA BER Lanalord ofepetentey SENATORS DECLARATION : 7 1 dere thatthe information ord ahie W arte 6 Of he date of is delraon onda all aS or ‘sinter quae conn sh he Soa Lunn oleae Sense pls ae shins silos he F tof 3o-cangce he sn of esaences ad laa Ss TS oF ca a lige Ss Rar Oe eae ANNEspi oom iia? | saesoss 2011/1190 sonitrseithssesty119 PROPERTY CHARGES 2@fsland Aso March 1, 2019 January 1 - December 31, 2013 pyrineee STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT May 7, 2013 Phone: (902) 308-4070 told Ena IaxendardGnow pe.ce Property No.: 453514-000 Website: wivuteardlandpe.ca eroages 5 Ge: Owners: cen-L.00006-001800 HEATHER J & MICHAEL DUFFY HEATHER J & MICHAEL D DUFFY 10 FRIENDLY LN CAVENDISH PE Coa 1NO Location: "OFRENOLY LN, CAVENDISH PAST DUE Property tax past due from previous years: $0.00 Late charges as of March 81, 2013 $0, TOTAL PAST DUE: $0.00 CURRENT Property Tax due fram prior years: $0.00 Provincial propery tax for 2013: $1,287.69 Municipality of Resort Municipality property tax for 2013: $210.63, ‘sland Waste Management Corporation fees for 2013: $120.00 Less credits and payments: $0.01 Less adjustments: $0.00 TOTAL CURRENT: $1,618.31 I |ACCOUNT BALANCE: $1,618.31 I PAYMENT SCHEDULE —— cc Description Amount Due Date [Past Due $0.00 Immediately (*) [2012 installment #1 $539.43 May 91, 2013, \2013 Installment #2 $599.44 ‘Aug. 31, 2013 \2013 installment #3 $599.44 Nov. 30, 2013 “The past due smount is due and payable immediately. Amounts past éve are subject o Interest atthe rate of 18% por annum, calculates diy.Princ NOTICE OF PROPERTY TAX 1 E ijand As of March 91,2018 [sta For Period: January 1- December 31,2019 i Maing Date: Way 72013 Page: 204 Breas: (60228-4070 rai: Sandand@am pce Property No.: 453514-000 ‘be: wvecisartondpace Aereage: 0.280 Ge: Swiners: HEATHER & MICHAEL 0OURFY HEATHER J & MICHAEL D DUFFY 10 FRIENDLY LN CAVENDISH PE COA 1NO Location; 10 FRENDLY LN CAVENDISH PROVINCIAL PROPERTY TAX "Non-Commercial Farm Commercial Residential | Other Resi Taxable Value Assessment 100,300.00 Rate (per $100 taxable valve) [eseseeen 1.00) ‘Base Provincial Property Tax $1,504.50 Credits Provincial Tax Crest ‘Owner Occupied Residential 216.81) Prorato tax (crest) dobit Farm assessment credit Faim use credit Environmental piling credit Environmental land erect ‘Adjusted Provincial Property Tax 83,287.68 PROVINCIAL PROPERTY TAX $1,287.69 MUNICIPAL PROPERTY TAX Non-Commercial Non-Commercial Farm Residential Other Residentiat ‘Other 10,800.00 $0,210 $210.63 | Conner “Taxable Value Assesement Rate (per $100 taxable value) ‘Base Municipal Property Ta Credits ‘Owner Occupied Residential Faum assessment credit Farm uso credit | Prorat tax cred) debit { | ‘Adjusted Municipal Property Tax $210.68 MUNICIPAL PROPERTY TAX _ _$210.63Edi prince NOTICE OF PROPERTY ASSESSMENT 124 a As of: March 31, 2013 g® [sla For Period: January 7 December 31, 2018 io Mailing Date: May’, 2018 “ Page: Sofa prone: (oaiss.70 Vesta: eonnaees Broperty Nou: 459514-000 8 a Sree: HEATHER J& MICHAEL O DUFFY HEATHER J & MICHAEL D DUFFY a 40 FRIENDLY LN CAVENDISH PE COA 1No Location: 10 FRIENDLY IN, CAVENOS MARKET VALUE ASSESSMENT Non-Commercial ‘Wor-Gommercial Farm Date Commerciat | — ~ Reason Residential [ Other __| Residential | Other Dee. 31, 2012 517540000) a Adjustments | dan 4, 2018 (51.1000) You ond austnent | — - — — : 7 Mar 31,2018 11420009 | ‘TOTAL MARKET VALUE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY (as of March 31, 2013) __ $114,300.00 ‘TAXABLE VALUE ASSESSMENT Non-Commerci ‘Commercial Farm Date Commercial . Now Comme Reason Residential | Other _| Residential | Other [ose 33,2002 | as ‘Adjustments Jan 1, 2018 (Passtnent Mr.31,2019 | 10030009 TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE ASSESSMENT OF PROPERTY (as of March 31, 2013) $100,300.00 (°). Year end adjustment may include depreciation, reappraisal, new construction and/or market growthplrinesy REFERRAL OF PROPERTY ASSESSMENT AND TAXES: ee es a Bes For eviod: —“amunyy Dovember 3, 2013 ie Hating Date: ay 7, 2013 Pager tela ae. oe ee Property No. 459514-000 : ee Acreage: 0.230 ce: Owners: HEATHER J MICHAEL OUFFY HEATHER J & MICHAEL D DUFFY 40 FRIENDLY LN CAVENDISH FE COA 1NO Location: 1OFIENOLY UN CAVENDISH ~ REFERRAL CLOSING DATE: August 5, 2013 thereby request @ review of my property assessment and taxes as follows: Address Change. | request that all correspondence related to this property be sent to the address noted below. | _nguiry. raise he following inquiry andlor give natice cf the change(s) regarding my property noted above, D_ Property Assessment Referral. | request reconsideration of the assessment on my property for the reasons noted belaw. Property Tax Referral, | request reconsideration of the properly charges on my property for the reasons noted below. Signature: - - Dates _ Telephone: = Z Email Meili: Provincial Tax Commissioner Hand Deliver te: Provincial Tax Commissioner Taxation and Property Fecords ‘Taxation and Property Records PO Box 2000 95 Rochford Street Charlottetown, PE C1A 7NB Charioitotown, PE OR _any Accoss PEI Centre. APPEALS (1) Any person who recelved a notice of assessment under section 18 or an amended notice of assessment under section 19 may refer in writing any assessment to the Minister within ninety days after the mailing of the notice. (2) Any person who refers an assessment to the Minister under subsection (1), shall set out in the reference his address and reasons for objecting to the assessment. (3) The Minister shail reconsider an assessment referred to him, under subsection (1), and shall vacate, confirm or vary the assessment, and where the reference is under subsection (1), the Minister shail send notice to the person of his decision and his reasons therefore, within one hundred and eighty days of receipt of the reference. (4) The decision of the Minister shall have affect on January 1 of the year for which the assessment appealed from was made, and any changes required to be made in the assessment roll as a result thereof, shall be ‘made within thiny days after the Minister has made his decision.TAB EConfidential 3 December 2014 Dr. Gary O’Brien, Clerk, The Senate of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A4 Cc: Jill Ann Joseph Dear Sir: This is further to my request of Sept. 24, 2014, for orientation documents, required by my lawyer, which you and Ms. Joseph kindly provided. 1:1 would be most grateful if you could provide me with the audio transcript, copies of all notes, working copies, drafts and final copy of the report by Jill Anne Joseph to the special subcommittee on living allowances of the Board of Internal economy, (Audit subcommittee) referred to explicitly by Ms. Joseph at page 7 of her RCMP interview, where she says “So | did up my little report but they didn’t like it because, | agreed that there was lack of clear criteria surrounding residency and they said no, no, no, itis very clear. Primary residence, they are supposed to live there. So to, | still maintain , yes primary residence is clear, but when it comes to the policy instrument surrounding that providing guidelines or criteria for how that’s to be met, that was not very clear. That was not well understood. “ 2: Further, in the interviews of both Ms. Joseph and Mr. O’Brien, there is reference to Ms. Joseph presenting a report on May 7, 2013 to the subcommittee, which is described as a draft of the Deloitte Report on Senator Duffy. Please provide all working notes, of Ms. Joseph and all drafts including the final one Ms.124 Joseph prepared leading up to the presentation of her report on May 7" to the steering subcommittee. 3: Mr. O’Brien stated in his RCMP interview, (see page 45) the Senate transcription people were also present during meetings between Senators and PMO staff dealing with the Audit Report on Senator Duffy and how and when the PMO wanted this matter resolved, Please therefore provide the transcripts, plus all notes, and minutes pertaining to these meetings, which will have taken place from February 7, 2013, through May 9, 2013. 4: On page 37 of Mr. O’Brien’s RCMP interview, he references Ms. Joseph's report, and states further that Ms. Joseph’s “internal Audit report has never seen the light of day,”and that the report detailed what number or percentage of Senators had met the criteria proposed to be introduced for primary residence. Please provide Ms. Joseph’s internal audit report, and if this information about the number of Senators who fulfilled all of the proposed criteria is separate from Ms. Joseph’s internal audit report, please also provide that information. ook forward to receiving this information soon. Thanks so much for your continuing assistance in this important matter. Yours truly {original signed by) Hon, Mike Duffy, Senator, Cavendish PEI 902-960-1001TAB F‘mona + ofteva + tone * enon + waoo egos + capt = vosourer + eling = mony london gowling 125 March 16, 2015 Maxime Fai i rect 613-783-8004 By Fax and Regular Mail ne eet TEE aEOT ‘maxime falle@gowings com Mr. Donald Bayne Fis No. 09852307 Bayne Sellar Boxall 200 Elgin St Ottawa, ON K2P 1L5 Dear Mr. Bayne: Re: Senator Michael Duffy - Request for Information and Documents We represent the Senate of Canada and write in this regard in response to your requests, as well as those of your client Senator Michael Dufly, to obtain certain documents, reports, drafts, notes and transcripts relating to and arising from the Special Subcommittee on Living Allowances of the Board of Internal Economy, as well as relating to and arising from the Audit Report on Senator Duffy. Please be advised that the documents requested will not be provided, as they are subject to the constitutionally-protected law of parliamentary privilege. ‘As you may be aware, parliamentary privilege protects proceedings in federal and provincial legislatures from outside interference. It has been defined as follows: Parliamentary privilege is the necessary immunity that the law provides for members of Parliament, and for members of the legislatures of each of the ten provinces and two territories, in order for these legislators to do their legislative work. It is also the necessary immunity that the law provides for anyone while taking part in a proceeding in Parliament or in a legislature. Finally, it is the authority and power of each House of Parliament and of each legislature to enforce that immunity. (See Canada (House of Commons) v. Vaid, 2005 SCC 30 at para. 29 (“Vaid”) ‘The source of parliamentary privitege lies in both common and statutory law. The legislatures retain inherent privilege over those powers which are necessary for them to function as legislative bodies. This privilege is set out in section 18 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which conveys on the Senate and the House of Commons the power to legislate their own privileges by statute, as follows: 18. The privileges, immunities, and powers to be held, enjoyed, and exercised by the Senate and by the House of Commons, and by the members thereof respectively, shall be such as are from time to time defined by Act of the Parliament of Canada, but so that any Act of the owing Late Hendeonu «Lawyers «Patent and Tade-merk Ages {160 Elgin Stet «Suite 2600 - Cuawa -Ontao - KIP 103 - Canada T 612-283-1781 F613-563-8A69 cout.. 126 gowings Parliament of Canada defining such grivileges, immunities, and powers shall not confer any privileges, immunities, or powers exceeding those at the passing of such Act held, enjoyed, and exercised by the Commons House of Parliament of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and by the members thereof. Sections 4 and 5 of the Parliament of Canada Act similarly provide that the Senate and the House of Commons, as well as their members, enjoy and exercise the like privileges, immunities and powers which were held, enjoyed and exercised by the House of Commons, U.K., in 1867, as well as such other privileges, immunities and powers defined by the Canadian Parliament, not exceeding those above, and that such privileges, immunities and powers are part of the general and public law of Canada to be taken notice of judicially. ‘The scope of parliamentary privilege is thus determined by reference to both Canadian and English Taw. As in Canada, English law contains both inherent and legislated privileges. The legislated privileges are set out in article 9 of the Bill of Rights, 1688 as follows: That the Freedom of Speech and Debates or Proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any Court ot Place out of Parliament. With respect to the common law, in Vaid, the Supreme Court of Canada stated the purpose of parliamentary privilege as follows: The purpose of privilege is to recognize Parliament's exclusive jurisdiction to deal with complaints within its privileged sphere of activity. As noted by Justice Binnie in the Vaid, “it is important that both Parliament and the courts respect the legitimate sphere of activity of the other”. Similarly, in Lavigne v. R., the Ontario Superior Court of Justice dealt with whether criminal charges laid against Senator Lavigne should be stayed as the Crown was unable to provide disclosure of the transcripts from the in camera Special Senatz Sub-Committee hearings into the Senator's alleged improper use of Senate resources. The Court held that the transcripts were subject to privilege. In ‘making this finding, the Court held that the inquiry into Senator Lavigne’s use of resources was a ‘matter “internal to the Senate”: [22] At paragraph 29 of Vaid, supta, decision, Binnic J. also identified disciplinary authority over its members as a recognized category of established privilege. The Senate Inquiry into Lavigne’s conduct was a matter of the discipline of a member of the Senate by conducting an inquiry into improper use of Senate resources by Senator Lavigne. The matter of discipline of a member of the Senate is a matter “internal to the Senate”, to be resolved by the Senate's ‘own procedure and I conclude would be subject to the Senate’s own procedure and subject to Parliamentary privilege following the reasoning in Vaid, supra. Page 2{23] 1 am satisfied that the existence and scope of the Senate’s Parliamentary privilege extends to the transcripts of an in-camera Senate Inquiry into alleged improper use of Senate resources by a member of the Senate of Canada. I am also satisfied that any outside interference in how the Senate Inquiry was conducted would undermine the level of autonomy required to enable the Senate and its members to do their work with dignity and efficiency. Similarly, there can be no doubt that the documents sought all selate to matters internal to the Senate and its own process and are, accordingly, subject to parliamentary privilege. As such, I regret that your requests and those of your client cannot be acceded to. Yo, truly, Faille Michel Patrice OTT_LAW 308829041 Page3ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN ~ and - MICHAEL DUFFY AFFIDAVIT BAYNE, SELLAR, BOXALL, Barristers & Solicitors, 200 Elgin Street, Suite 500, Ottawa, Ontario, K2P ILS, Tel: (613) 236-0535, Fax: (613) 236-6958.