CBC Global Header Navigation

 
CBCnews
EMAIL | PRINT | REPORT TYPO | SEND YOUR FEEDBACK | Bookmark and Share

GuergisJafferWatch: The twists, the turns, the confusing contradictions (UPDATED CONSTANTLY)

Wait, the ethics commissioner never got a reference from the PM?

That's what she told The Current this morning: 


Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson: I have no had an official request from the PM to investigate anything relating to Ms. Guergis.

Anna Maria Tremonti, The Current: Who has requested then, if he hasn't?

MD: I haven't had any request.

AMT: From anyone?

MD: No. Um..

AMT: So when you say you decided not to...

MD: I have also got the power to self-initiate if I feel I've got reasonable grounds, but I have very little information at this time.

AMT: So you're saying you don't have enough information to decide to go ahead. Where would you get that information that you need to decide.

MD: Well I'm monitoring the situation by watching news reports and whatnot, but I have a responsibility, basically... the reason why that notice, that press release went out is that it was in the public domain and I have to consider the person that a complaint is made about. Once it was out in the public domain, I had to let her know what the situation was. Umm. So.

AMT: But you're telling me you're getting the information the way the rest of us are?

MD: Uh, well, I've had one referral from the PM, but it wasn't an official request.

AMT: What's the difference?

MD: The difference is I have to have reasonable grounds and I have to have a section of the Act or the Code - and it could be either - indicated, with respect to what it is I'm to investigate. And I don't have either of those things.


All of which is a wee bit puzzling, since the prime minister was pretty darn categorical in his statement last Friday (emphasis added): 


"Last night my office became aware of serious allegations regarding the conduct of the Honourable Helena Guergis.  These allegations relate to the conduct of Ms. Guergis and do not involve any other Ministers, MPs, Senators or federal government employees. 

"I have referred the allegations to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner and to the RCMP.  Under the circumstances, I will not comment on them further. 

"Ms. Guergis offered her resignation from the Ministry, and I accepted it.  Pending a resolution, she will sit outside of the Conservative Party Caucus.  I have asked the Honourable Rona Ambrose to assume additional responsibility for the Status of Women portfolio."


In a statement released by her office the following Tuesday, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson said that she was "not in a position to investigate Guergis," but didn't mention that she hadn't actually been formally asked to do so by the PM's office. I guess this could be a bit of semantic confusion over the difference between "referring" and "requesting" an investigation, but honestly, it's hard to know what to make of this latest twist in the tale. I'll update this post with the audio and any further developments. 

NEARLY-INSTA-UPDATE: Okay, sounds like it is, in fact, a question of terminology. Here's what PMO communications director Dimitri Soudas had to say this morning: 

"We received serious and credible allegations. We turned that information over to the RCMP and the Ethics commissioner. We did not provide direction to either the RCMP or the Ethics commissioner."

It's still not clear exactly why Dawson felt that she "wasn't in a position to investigate," although without knowing what information was turned over to her office by PMO - or, it's worth noting, precisely what the "serious and credible allegations" are -- at least officially -- it's hard to speculate on why she would have come to that conclusion. But it does sound like the matter was, indeed, referred to her, although no formal request was made. 

PUT THAT ON THE RECORD: The official response from PMO, sent out by Soudas to the gallery list a few moments ago, in which he confirms that media reports -- hey, that's me -- are correct. (Also, hey, look how right I was in my initial speculation over the source of the confusion): 

Media are reporting that the Prime Minister never made a REQUEST to the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner concerning the Hon. Helena Guergis.

These reports are correct and entirely consistent with the Prime Minister's statement on Friday.  Information was FORWARDED to the Ethics Commissioner and to the RCMP and these authorities were left to make their own decisions about next steps.  The Prime Minister and PMO did not "request" or "direct" any specific action.  These authorities are independent and will make their own determinations.

The reports also claim that the Prime Minister did not provide specific details of allegations.  This is also correct.  The referrals to the Commissioner and RCMP made clear that the information was second-hand and identified the source of the information for such follow-up as these authorities felt appropriate.
 

P.S., from the PMO again:  Soudas has sent out one more bulletin, with one more statement to add to the above:

The Commissioner's office was briefed on all available details.

MEANWHILE, GUERGIS' LAWYER, HOWARD RUBEL EMAILS THIS, TO SELECTED MEDIA:

After days of unfair speculation we finally know what the allegations are. More important, we know that the source of these allegations is a report from a private investigator who, apparently while presenting himself as another potential victim of a man currently facing fraud charges, was told these ridiculous 'boasts' in an attempt to convince the investigator to do business with him. We believe these circumstances speak for themselves.

Ms. Guergis vigorously denies all of this man's bizarre claims, and looks forward to helping the RCMP demonstrate that they are completely false.  She will not be commenting further on these matters until the ongoing investigation is concluded.

MARK YOUR CALENDARS:

Further to the motion adopted at the Government Operations committee yesterday to study "renewable energy project funding by the Government of Canada, and associated lobbying and advising activities associated with such funding," a little more on the invitation to appear that's now been emailed to this "man facing fraud charges", as Rubel calls him: Nazim Gillani, aka Rahim Jaffer's dining companion last September, and the person whose face was first splashed on the front of the Toronto Star last week. The date for his appearance at committee has been set already:  Wednesday, April 28, 2010, from 3:30 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. The email from the committee also adds:

The Committee has decided that in case this invitation is declined, it would use its power to order the said appearance.

FOUND: ARTHUR HAMILTON, lawyer for Conservative Party of Canada

The CBC's Alison Crawford has tracked down Arthur Hamilton, the lawyer cited in media reports as being the source of the information relayed to the prime minister. (The private investigator in this saga, Derek Snowdy, reportedly passed on his information about Gillani, Jaffer and Guergis to Hamilton in his law office last Friday morning.) Alison tells us that while he was polite, he won't be making any public statements and will not confirm or deny anything about this case. He told her he understands why the media are calling him and he apologized again for not being able to confirm or deny whether he was the person who was contacted by Snowdy, and whether he passed the information on to the PMO.

DID SNOWDY SHOP HIS STORY AROUND?

Today's Star story suggested Snowdy took his information to the Conservative Party because he was a "committed party member." But then CTV reported that Snowdy first offered the information to the Liberals, who "ignored him." Our Rosemary Barton asked the Liberals if this was true. The Liberal spokesman wrote back:

Apparently a receptionist took a call from someone who said he was a private investigator last week. The call was never returned. We have no record of any e-mails.

We don't deal with private investigators Rosemary. 

METAUPDATE - YES, THAT INCLUDES PETER DONOLO

At 2:40 PM ET this afternoon, Commenter MattFlores claimed that Snowdy, who he/she had previously said he knew personally, "will swear a signed affidavit that Wednesday April 8th, he contacted and SPOKE to Peter Donolo, and was informed by Donolo that the Liberals "had no interest in the information." Intrigued by the very specific tone of the allegation, I sought -- and received -- the following response from OLO communications director Mario Lague: 

A receptionist took a call from a man saying he was a private investigator last Thursday, she listened to him, took down his phone number. And that was it. His call was not returned. We do not have a record of his e-mail either. Peter did not talk to him.

That sounds pretty darned categorical to me, so until that promised affidavit -- or, alternately, Mr. Snowdy himself -- surfaces and reasserts the claim, I'm going to tentatively declare it debunked.


SO, UH -- IS THAT A YES OR A NO, MR. GILLANI? 

Courtesy of Former Colleague Aaron Wherry at macleans.ca, a somewhat cryptic response from Gillani's communications counsel (and part-time pet photographer) Brian Gilgore on the latest developments: 

You probably know Nazim Gillani has been "invited" by a Hourse of Commons committee to appear before it on April 28.

This idea of House of Commons committees is new to us -- Nazim is a business man, not a politician -- and so we are treating this, at least for the next few days, as being similar to the idea of  a matter being "before the courts" and thus we are not saying very much.

Remember, the CTV report said others had said Nazim spoke about various things, and CTV was clear in saying there was no confirmation that pictures actually existed, or other items in the allegations were true.

Even local radio in Toronto this morning was careful to include phrasing saying there was no confirmation of the story about any (alleged) photos.

And our position is that with the court proceding on the 21st and the House of Commons committee on the 28th that we should not say anything because of the before the courts / Parliament restrictions.

Tags: blackberry jungle, guergisjafferwatch, helena guergis, mary dawson mary dawson, rahim jaffer