The big incident from the end of the Conservative convention was in the closing, when Senator Irving Gerstein took to the stage to boast about the party’s fiscal position, but in the process, revealed that he told Nigel Wright that he refused to allow the party fund – which he controls – to pay for Duffy’s expenses. This contradicts the Wright affidavit that said that they initially offered to pay the bill when they thought it was a mere $30,000 but balked when the bill was $92,000. Wright’s lawyer responded that they had nothing to say about “the latest characterisation of events” at this time – which has us all wondering which version of events is the truth. And more to the point, that if Gerstein was involved in the repayment scheme, even by refusing it, it begs the question as to why he’s not being hung out to dry like the others are. On Global’s The West Block on Sunday morning, Jason Kenney hinted that at some point, Wright will reveal what he knows, which could be very interesting if and when that happens – and if that timetable moves up should the PM continue to demonise him for the whole affair. As well, a PMO staffer says that the legal fees the party covered for Duffy were related to his audit.
Tag Archives: Nigel Wright
Roundup: Kenney and Rajotte back Wright
More signs of independent thought emerge within the Conservative caucus, as Jason Kenney has proclaimed that he’s still going to defend Nigel Wright’s character while Harper has taken the route of demonizing him in the wake of the whole ClusterDuff affair. Later in the day, James Rajotte joined that chorus. That Kenney, a minister, has a message deviating from Harper’s, is the third minister now who has had a different message from the boss, which John Geddes points out, is a blow for the notion of cabinet solidarity, which is a pretty fundamental notion in Responsible Government as the executive needs to speak with one voice. I’m not sure what it all means yet, but it’s certainly interesting – especially on the eve of a party convention where unity in the face of adversity will no doubt be the message that they are trying to put forward.
QP: Calandra deflects
It was Friday hours on a Thursday, given the courtesy granted to the Conservatives for their convention, and attendance was only slightly better than any given Friday. The final member’s statement before QP was given to Conservative Corneliu Chisu, who played up his native Transylvanian accent to warn about how scary the Liberal leader and his plans were, which is now a Halloween tradition for the Conservatives. Nathan Cullen started off QP proper by asking how many cheques were written on Duffy’s behalf, but Paul Calandra, after a message about safety on Halloween, gave the usual talking points about how Wright took full responsibility and so on. Cullen asked how many people in the PMO knew about the payment. Calandra decried that the NDP didn’t want to talk about to talk about the economy. Cullen raised the spectre of the Liberal sponsorship scandal, and Cullen reminded him that they wanted to form a coalition government with then. Nicole Turmel was up next, asking when Harper last spoke to Nigel Wright, but Calandra simply insisted that they wanted to talk about more important issues. For the Liberals, Ralph Goodale asked for an itemised invoice from Duffy’s lawyer to demonstrate why they charged $13,000. Calandra brought up the sponsorship scandal and the alleged cheque to Joe Fontana from Public Works to pay for its son’s wedding. When Goodale wanted to know how Harper couldn’t know given how many people in his inner sanctum, Calandra responded by calling the Liberals snakes and accused their senators of standing in the way. When Goodale brought up Duffy’s allegation that he was coached to lie, Calandra mused about what Justin Trudeau thought about Chrsytia Freeland talking about people not having their father’s job.
Roundup: No closure, new motions
There remains no resolution to the issue of the proposed suspensions in the Senate, as the Conservatives there found their attempt to impose closure to be out of order and they have pulled the motions in favour of a new one, which ties things up even further. Oh, but apparently their ham-fistedness is the Liberals’ fault, because they won’t stand aside and just pass it. Because yeah, that’s how things work in our parliamentary system. As it stands, those motions may not see a vote until Friday, but may stretch into next week. Glen McGregor checks Mike Duffy’s speech against his speaking notes, and where the deviations from Hansard were. Joe Clark doesn’t think too much of Harper’s handling of the whole Senate situation. Paul Wells dissects Harper’s role in the mounting problems facing him with the Wright/Duffy affair, and how his usual stubborn streak is playing out – in spades. Chantal Hébert wonders about Nigel Wright’s silence in the face of his demonization by Harper, and how he may be the one to bring Harper down. Andrew Coyne bemoans the way in which the Conservatives are chucking away the conventions that govern our parliamentary system.
QP: Harper hitting back
Both Harper and Mulcair were back in the House, and ready for another round. Mulcair began with giving Harper a chance to be “crystal clear” as to whether Nigel Wright resigned or was fired. Harper said that they agreed that his actions were improper which was why he was no longer working in the PMO. Mulcair pressed in French, but Harper dodged once again and repeated the answer in French. Mulcair asked how many cheques were issued to Duffy as “hush money,” which Harper called a false allegation and reminded him that parties help members with legal assistance. Mulcair wondered if a $90,000 payment was a valid legal expense, and Harper assured him that it was not a party expense, and that NDP MPs were also provided with “substantial legal assistance.” Mulcair wondered what was done by the law firm on behalf of the PM that was worth $13,000. Harper simply repeated the line about legal assistance, and further alleged that the NDP paid damages on Mulcair’s behalf in a lawsuit. With Justin Trudeau in Calgary to deliver a speech on energy, it was up to Ralph Goodale to lead off, and he asked when Harper first heard that his staff had counselled Duffy to lie. Paul Calandra got up in Harper’s stead and accused the Liberals of making victims of the three senators plus former senator Mac Harb. Goodale wondered why Harper took a weekend to decide that Wright needed to be fired after previously being called “honourable.” Calandra assured him that the PM was clear, and hey, pipelines! Goodale pressed one last time, and listed the many ethical lapses on Harper’s part. The Speaker warned him about veering into party business, but Calandra got up instead and regaled a parable about his children getting an allowance.
Roundup: A record year for privacy breaches
The Privacy Commissioner tabled her annual report yesterday, including a separate audit of the Canada Revenue Agency, and it doesn’t have a lot of nice things to say – a record number of complaints, a record number of reported data breaches, and over at the CRA, lax controls allowed employees to access personal tax files for no appropriate reason.
QP: The Mulcair and Harper show
Thomas Mulcair launched QP with a bit of a soliloquy about how he was just in Brandon, Manitoba, where people were disgusted with the scandal and mess, and wondered why the PM kept changing his story. Harper rather demurely dismissed the notion that his story had changed, but asserted that those who broke the rules were no longer on the public payroll, as he hoped those senators would soon be. Mulcair pressed — Duffy said there were at least two cheques, and could he say what they were. Harper asserted, straight-faced, that the party regularly reimburses members of its caucus for legal expenses, but Duffy’s abuse of taxpayer dollars should be enough to have him removed from the Senate. Mulcair wanted to know who knew of this second cheque but Harper simply repeated his answer. For his final question of the round, Mulcair wondered somewhat rhetorically how many lawyers it took for “no legal agreement.” Harper asserted that he didn’t know what Mulcair was referring to. Justin Trudeau got up next, and brought up the contradictions once again and demanded that Harper testify under oath. Harper rejected the premise of the question, and went on a tear about how awful Duffy was and how he wanted him removed from the payroll. When pressed, Harper went further about Duffy’s sins and how he hasn’t paid back a single cent from his own funds, which was wrong. When Trudeau tried one last time to impress upon Harper the need to testify under oath, Harper returned to his earlier talking points.
Roundup: The tale of the second cheque
Boom! The ClusterDuff exploded yet again yesterday, with yet more revelations from Senator Mike Duffy, who took advantage of what could be his final days of the protection of parliamentary privilege, and laid out yet more accusations against the PMO. This after a morning where Stephen Harper took to the radio waves and declared that Nigel Wright had been fired, in direct contradiction to all previous assertions that Wright resigned. So while the Commons fixated on this contradiction, Senator Duffy took the floor in the Senate, and detonated his next bomb – that there was not one cheque, but two, and that the talk of an RBC loan was actually a script from the PMO that he had been made to deliver. That second cheque was from the Conservative party lawyer, Arthur Hamilton, which paid for Duffy’s legal fees – and this time, he provided documents to prove it. The party doesn’t deny covering the legal expenses, saying that they will sometimes pay the legal fees of their caucus members. This is likely an indication, according to John Geddes, that the party was still keen to defend him and by extension their decision to appoint him as a PEI senator, with their particular reading of those rules. While Duffy contended that there remains a whole other email chain in the hands of his lawyers that he wants to see turned over to the RCMP, though an envelope was later handed to the CBC which appeared to cast some doubt as to Duffy’s version of events – or at the very least was a good trial run as to his scripting around where the money came from. If there is one bright side to all of this it’s the level of engagement that the public is demonstrating, and the fact that senators are pointing to the number of emails they are receiving from people who want to see due process – and one senator that I spoke with this afternoon brought this up without prompting. And while these senators have zero sympathy for their three embattled peers, they at least want to ensure that there is process followed.
QP: Fired or resigned?
With none of the leaders present in the House, it was up to Megan Leslie to lead off QP for the NDP, where she asked about the contradiction about Harper claiming on the radio earlier in the morning that Nigel Wright had been fired whereas it was previously established that he resigned. Paul Calandra was up to respond, and said that to his credit, Wright had taken full responsibility for the payout to Duffy and no longer worked in the PMO. Leslie tried to press as to how many Conservatives were aware of the payout to Duffy, but Calandra insisted that it was all in the court affidavits. Nycole Turmel was up next to repeat the same in French, to which Calandra repeated his same talking points, and for her supplemental, Turmel brought up the deal that Senator Carignan offered to Braseau, and wondered if the PM was aware of it. Calandra said that they wanted them to take a measure of responsibility and called for the Liberals in the Senate to stand down and pass the suspensions (never mind the senators in the Conservative caucus who are opposed). Dominic LeBlanc was up for the Liberals, and returned to the same questions about the Prime Minister’s changing talking points, but Calandra didn’t veer from his same talking points, and again called on the Liberals in the Senate to stop their obstruction. LeBlanc closed the round by asking why Harper wouldn’t answer questions about the affair under oath, but Calandra’s talking points didn’t change.
QP: Harper hits back — at the Liberals
It’s Thomas Mulcair’s birthday, not that he was really going to get any answers out of Harper as a gift for the occasion. Mulcair began by asking a rather lengthy question around the stonewalling around what Nigel Wright knew, but Harper insisted that Wright kept the whole affair to himself. Mulcair brought up Ray Novak and Marjory LeBreton’s alleged call to Mike Duffy telling him that the deal was off. Harper responded that Mulcair was buying into the story that Duffy was the victim rather than the fact of the misspending that got him booted from caucus. When Mulcair tried to clarify whether or not Harper had singled out Duffy at the caucus meeting in February, Harper said that the spending of the three senators was brought up in caucus and he made his emphatic statement then. When Mulcair asked when Harper did threaten to expel Duffy from the Senate, Harper reiterated that rule-breakers had no place in caucus. Leading for the Liberals was Dominic LeBlanc, as Justin Trudeau was speaking away speaking in Washington DC. LeBlanc asked why one former PMO staffer who was involved was promoted despite potentially criminal behaviour. Harper responded by calling out Liberal senators for holding up the suspension without pay of those three senators. LeBlanc pushed, bringing up or their questionable hires by the PMO, but Harper kept insisting that the Liberal senators were keeping those misbehaving from being punished (which is of course false, as they are simply looking to put it to committee to give it due process).