Harper’s former lawyer says he was ‘blindsided’ by secret deal
Stephen Harper’s former in-house lawyer testified Friday that he was “blindsided” by senior staffers in the Prime Minister’s Office who cut him out of secret negotiations they were having with Sen. Mike Duffy.
Ben Perrin, legal counsel to Harper and his office in February and March 2013, when the PMO was desperately trying to bury the Senate spending scandal, said he was kept ignorant of key pieces of information – notably, the ongoing negotiations that Harper’s thenchief of staff, Nigel Wright, were having with Duffy.
“I look back at this as a situation I certainly felt blindsided by,” said Perrin, who has referred to his role as a “messenger” tasked for the most part with communicating with Duffy’s Ottawa lawyer at the time, Janice Payne.
“As counsel in the matter, I was clearly left in the dark,” he said. “This is not the proper way to conduct a legal matter.”
Perrin repeated his testimony of Thursday in which he said he was unaware that Wright had decided to secretly pay Duffy’s $90,000 expense tab out of his own pocket until minutes before a conference call with Payne in which Wright told her the same thing.
Perrin, a University of British Columbia law professor, also emphasized that he was in the room during the conference call with Wright and Harper’s longtime adviser and current chief of staff, Ray Novak.
Novak has denied knowing about the $90,000 payment until it became public.
At Wright’s insistence, Canadians were told that Duffy had paid the money from his own funds.
Wright testified earlier in the week that he wanted his largesse kept secret because the Bible guided people giving to charity to be modest and “not let the right hand know what the left hand is doing.”
Duffy has pleaded not guilty to 31 breach of trust, fraud and bribery charges, three of which relate to Wright’s $90,000.
Duffy’s defence lawyer, Don Bayne, claims that the $90,000 was the final piece in a secret deal Wright and other senior Harper aides forced on Duffy, who was insistent that he was innocent of any wrongdoing in his expense claims.
Perrin, who resigned from the PMO in late March 2013, said he was also in the dark about efforts among Conservative Party hierarchy to help develop the secret Duffy deal that Wright described as an “agreement” but that Bayne has characterized as a forced “capitulation.”
“It was a very awkward situation I found myself in,” said Perrin, “but as a lawyer I was obliged to act. Lawyers act for all kinds of clients.”
During cross-examination by Bayne, Perrin said that Wright’s “Good to go from the PM” comment in an email about a five-point deal with Duffy convinced him that Harper had personally blessed what was expected to be the finale of protracted, often acrimonious negotiations aimed at getting Duffy to admit his “mistake” and repay the money.
“I never directly communicated with the prime minister,’ said Perrin, “but when Mr. Wright wrote ‘Good to go from the PM,’ I took that to mean the prime minister himself had directly approved that.
“Having read some of the media, I understand there was an explanation given that was different from my understanding.” (Harper denies saying “good to go” or knowing anything about Wright’s intention to pay $90,000.)
“And you trusted that when Mr. Wright represented things to you, he spoke for the prime minister?” asked Bayne. “Yes,” Perrin responded.
There can be vigorous debate on issues within the PMO but once a decision is made, Perrin added, “it’s time to move on.”
Asked about Perrin’s testimony on the campaign trail Friday, Harper said, “Mr. Perrin has admitted that he never told me” that Wright was paying Duffy’s expenses.
“The fact of the matter is this — in February, I told Mr. Duffy and Mr. Wright that I thought Mr. Duffy should repay his dubious expense claims,” Harper added.
In court, Bayne pressed Perrin to admit that he had little context to work with as he pursued his legal duties on the Duffy file.
“I did not know what information I did not know,” he responded. “Now I’m beginning to sound like (former U.S. secretary of defense) Donald Rumsfeld.”
In his dealings with Duffy’s lawyer, Perrin agreed it became clear that Duffy was resisting repaying the money.
Crown lawyers allege that Duffy actively sought the money from the PMO or Conservative Party sources, along with guarantees that any efforts from Senate colleagues to oust his from the red chamber would be blocked by Conservative hierarchy, and a guarantee the RCMP or other “third parties” would not become involved and the case.
Wright rejected the specific reference to the RCMP and Duffy dropped it.
Bayne alleges that the entire deal with Duffy was a construct forced upon the former TV newsman by a PMO anxious to close a controversy that was politically embarrassing to Harper and his government.
The trial is to continue Monday for one more week. It will re-convene, likely with Duffy taking the stand, in November. The federal election is Oct. 19.
It was a very awkward situation I found myself in but as a lawyer I was obliged to act. Lawyers act for all kinds of clients.