Live Chat

And now on travel points -- and various definitions and whether it includes/excludes partisan work.

Bayne: Suggesting Duffy was pressured to travel. Using his 64 travel points to travel at "behest" of PMSH. He didn't have a choice except to travel when asked by PM

Trial continues with the defence's cross examination ‎of Mark Audcent, former Senate law clerk ... descriptions of public vs private business, how/where/when trips can be claimed...

B: What about the elderly? If Duffy was assigned a focus, focus on elderly? / A: Elderly has always been issue of concern for senate, so yes would be OK

Bayne on contracts: Audcent agrees that a company (not just a person) can get a contract from a Senator, and that company can then hire other people to do work to fulfil that contract w/Senator.

Bayne now on Tab 18, Senate Personnel Services Contract. Showing Duffy's contact with Ottawa ICF (Donohue's company)

B: Where you have a corporate research contract set up, unidentified persons will do valid research? A: Yes

Bayne says he has about 30 mins left after lunch. Holmes/Crown adds he has 30 mins more.

Judge OKs, no point in bringing the next witness in for a short period, and ‎adds: "We all know about lawyer sand timing"‎ - laughs.

H: Defence said upon appointment to Senate, your role has change. He isn't Mike Duffy from Kanata anymore, and is Mike Duffy from PEI. Correct?

H: Do you know who Justin Bieber is? / A: Yes

Context to earlier Bieber reference... is that Bayne argued that upon appointment to the Senate, a person is transformed from a private citizen to Senator, which carries with it responsibilities

H asks A if Duffy met the constitutional requirement to sit as senator. Audcent says Senators have to ensure they always meet requirements.

Holmes asking about Bayne's testimony saying that Duffy spend $100k to make his PEI home a primary residence

H: If he's renoing the cottage in 2012 to make it into primary residence, what was it before 2012?

Bayne - Wants to raise an issue that’s troubling for me. There’s an issue for untimely disclosure. These charges were laid about a year ago and I’ve prepared for months, and prepared all weekend. After 10 a.m. I was handed a document – part of resource guide (exhibit A tab 7 chap 4) which was the only one ever produced to us. There was none other aspect of the resource guide … perhaps here were document that should have been sourced a long time ago.

Bayne – “I thought I knew what the documents were that were disclosed to me. I can’t yet know how big of a problem this is for me… it’s unfortunate… I came prepared, and now the witness is going to deal with a document that I’ve never seen

Neubauer – the document in question is the Senator Resource Guide. It’s one of the document provided to newly appointed senator in the briefing package. … what was in our possession was Chapter 5 relating to budgets, related to the Donohue counts and service contact.

Judge – obviously it’s not a novel situation in trials with delayed disclosure. .. when these situation arise, the court has to look at ways to addressing them, and in this particular case, the Crown already conceded, Mr. Bayne will be allowed as much time as appropriate to come up to speed with the disclosure. We’ll commence, and take an appropriate break – ‘hopeful it’s shorter than longer’ – so let’s start by calling the witness.

Makhlouf explaining the process of submitting and approving contracts. Makhlouf doesn't validate contractors, that's the Senators sole responsibility. After receiving contract, she is to assess and validate info, look at nature of services (make sure it’s parliamentary work), amount to be paid (she'll only question if amounts seem unreasonable).

JN: generally the amount in the budget was between $149k and 169k/year in the 2008-2013 years *** / SM: probably, I can’t confirm.