Wright admits his actions flouted transparency norms
Court also hears how the PMO pressured Tory senators to revise report to go easier on Duffy
OTTAWA— Nigel Wright ended his week on the stand by conceding that the story he allowed Sen. Mike Duffy, the Prime Minister’s Office and Senate leadership to tell the public did not meet the standards Canadians expect from Parliament.
“It’s not the highest standards of transparency or clarity,” Wright, former chief of staff to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, told Duffy’s criminal trial on the last day of cross-examination by defence lawyer Donald Bayne.
The detail Wright left out of statements to the media, which the PMO had played a role in crafting, was the fact that he had personally provided Duffy with the $90,172 he needed to reimburse the Senate for inappropriate expenses he had claimed for his home in the Ottawa area.
“You don’t think that’s misleading to the Canadian public, knowing what you know?” Bayne asked after pointing out a scripted statement would have Duffy saying he had repaid the expenses.
“I didn’t think it was misleading in a significant respect,” said Wright, who has told the court that he viewed Duffy as having repaid the expenses and that he had reimbursed him for doing so.
“You know, it just shocks me for you to keep maintaining that, because look where it’s got you, this misrepresentation.
“It is significant. You don’t have a job in the PMO anymore,” Bayne said.
“I agree, it was actually quite significant,” Wright said.
It is also one of the main reasons Wright, who is now living in London as a managing director for his old firm, Onex Corp., was called to testify at the trial.
Duffy has pleaded not guilty to 31 charges, including bribery, fraud and breach of trust. Wright was investigated by the RCMP but never charged.
Bayne also used his cross-examination of Wright to walk the court through emails showing just how the PMO and a small group of senators manoeuvred behind the scenes to ensure the story Canadians were told — that Duffy had made a mistake because of ambiguous forms but had repaid the expenses because it was the right thing to do — unfolded as they thought best.
That included pressuring Conservative senators to revise a report to be tabled by the Senate standing committee on internal economy, budgets and administration so that it would go easier on Duffy than it did on Patrick Brazeau and former Liberal Mac Harb. Both have since resigned from the Senate, also under scrutiny for Ottawa-area housing expenses.
“I just met with (Sen. Carolyn Stewart-Olsen). I gave her our changes. She agreed with them 100 per cent,” Patrick Rogers, who was manager of parliamentary affairs in the PMO, wrote to colleagues in an email on May 8, 2013, that was presented as evidence at trial.
“I reinforced with her that the implementing of all of the changes to the report was the fulfilment of her commitment to Nigel and our building. She indicated she understood this,” said the email from Rogers.
Wright told the court the PMO wanted the committee report on Duffy to reflect the conclusion reached by forensic accounting firm Deloitte: that the rules and forms surrounding secondary living expenses were ambiguous.
The committee’s two other reports, however, addressing Harb’s and Brazeau’s expenses, disagreed with Deloitte and concluded the forms were clear enough for the senators to have known better. Wright’s six-day appearance coincided with the earlierthan-expected federal election campaign, and his testimony, along with hundreds of emails depicting how the PMO managed the political cri- sis, have prompted reporters to grill Harper daily about who in his office knew what, and when, about the money from Wright.
The idea there were really two trials happening this week — the criminal proceedings in Ottawa and the one playing out on the campaign trail — made an entrance in the courtroom on Wednesday as Crown attorney Mark Holmes accused Bayne of trying to score political points.
“This seems to be entirely politically motivated,” Holmes said as he made a spirited objection to a line of questioning that appeared aimed at undermining Wright’s assertion he had not told Harper about the $90,172 he gave Duffy. With files from Tonda MacCharles