National Post (National Edition)
PRESSURE WAS NOT ‘INAPPROPRIATE’
TOP PUBLIC SERVANT SAYS FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL MAY DISAGREE
OTTAWA • In extraordinary testimony to the House of Commons justice committee, Canada’s top public servant has revealed details of his meetings with former Minister of Justice Jody WilsonRaybould — and fiercely denied that he or anyone else subjected her to “inappropriate” pressure over the Snc-lavalin criminal case.
Michael Wernick, the clerk of the privy council, insisted his conversations with WilsonRaybould were “entirely appropriate” and “lawful.” He said Wilson-raybould had plenty of chances to complain if she felt otherwise, but she never did.
“It is my conclusion and my assertion based on all the information that I have that there was no inappropriate pressure on the Minister of Justice in this matter,” he said.
Yet he also acknowledged that when he talked to Wilson-raybould on Dec. 19 about the case, he brought up the economic consequences of allowing the criminal prosecution of Snc-lavalin to proceed, rather than negotiating a remediation agreement that would avoid a potential court conviction.
“I conveyed to her that a lot of her colleagues and the prime minister were quite anxious about what they were hearing and reading in the business press about the future of the company, the options that were being openly discussed in the business press about the company moving or closing,” he said.
“So I can tell you with complete assurance that my view of those conversations is that they were within the boundaries of what’s lawful and appropriate, I was informing the minister of context. She may have another view of the conversation, but that’s something that the ethics commissioner could sort out.”
He repeatedly pointed to the investigation already underway by Ethics Commissioner Mario Dion, calling it the best way to get to the bottom of the controversy.
Wernick also slammed the initial Globe and Mail story that cited confidential sources alleging Wilson-raybould was pressured.
“I am here to say to you that The Globe and Mail article contains errors, unfounded speculation, and in some cases is simply defamatory,” he said.
Right from his opening statement, it was clear Wernick would be going beyond what senior public servants typically say in public. He told the committee he was “deeply concerned about my country now, its politics, and where it’s headed.”
“I worry about the rising tides of incitements to violence when people use terms like ‘treason’ and ‘traitor’ in open discourse,” he said. “Those are the words that lead to assassination.”
Above all, he said, he’s worried “about people losing faith in the institutions of governance in this country, and that’s why these proceedings are so important.”
Wernick’s testimony was by far the most candid and detailed account of the SNCLavalin affair yet given in public. It also sets the stage for Wilson-raybould’s testimony to the committee expected early next week.
Wernick predicted WilsonRaybould would take issue with three conversations throughout the fall of 2018. The first took place on Sept. 17 and involved Wilson-raybould, Wernick, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The second was on Dec. 18, 2018, and involved Prime Minister’s Office staff and WilsonRaybould’s then-chief of staff. The third was the conversation between Wernick and Wilson-raybould that took place the following day.
The director of public prosecutions had decided on Sept. 4 to proceed with the prosecution of Snc-lavalin. The conversations concerned whether Wilson-raybould should issue a direction that a remediation agreement be negotiated. Wernick said that at the September meeting, Wilson-raybould “advised the prime minister of her view that a deferred prosecution agreement was not a good course, and she had no intention of intervening.”
It is a long-standing constitutional principle — known as the Shawcross doctrine — that the minister of justice is not politically pressured when acting in the role of attorney-general with oversight of criminal prosecutions.
Wernick said Trudeau told Wilson-raybould at the September meeting that any decisions were her own to make. He said he could not give details of the Dec. 18 meeting with PMO staff, as he wasn’t present. However, he denied that his own conversation on Dec. 19 crossed the so-called line.”
“It would appear to most people that our former attorney-general certainly felt that pressure coming from someone,” NDP MP Murray Rankin said.
“The question that I think you are going to have to come to a view with, as will the ethics commissioner, is inappropriate pressure,” Wernick responded. “There’s pressure “Shawcross to get it right on every decision. To approve, to not approve. To act, to not act. I am quite sure the minister felt pressure to get it right. Part of my conversation with her on Dec. 19 was conveying context that there were a lot of people worried about what would happen. The consequences — not for her — the consequences for the workers and the communities and the suppliers.”