This is important because the Crown had said money from Duffy's contract w/Gerald Donohue was illegally funnelled to other people
Bayne now on Tab 18, Senate Personnel Services Contract. Showing Duffy's contact with Ottawa ICF (Donohue's company)
Q: The senator can contract with individuals and corporations? A: Yes // B: And corporations itself can't do things, it's people who do things? A: Yes
B: Where you have a corporate research contract set up, unidentified persons will do valid research? A: Yes
B: They might be precise people, or if that person doesn't have a certain skill, then people will have to be sourced? A: I would think so, Yes.
Bayne says he has about 30 mins left after lunch. Holmes/Crown adds he has 30 mins more.
Holmes says he doesn't have any more witnesses today and if Judge will be OK if we break early today when he's finished, around 15:15.
Judge OKs, no point in bringing the next witness in for a short period, and adds: "We all know about lawyer sand timing" - laughs.
Defence finished with its cross examination, and Holmes is examining Audcent again.
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?
Holmes uses this example: Constitution says he must be "full age" of 30, what does it mean? / A: He must be 30 years old
H: Do you know who Justin Bieber is? / A: Yes
H: Bieber is 21 years old. So if PM appoints Bieber tomorrow, would he become 30 years old? A: Of course not.
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
Audcent says a Senator can't be appointed unless they are a resident of the province they represent. They can't promise or plan to move there.
H asks A if Duffy met the constitutional requirement to sit as senator. Audcent says Senators have to ensure they always meet requirements.
H asked if Duffy's residence changed upon Duffy's appointment to the Senate: "The question where you're resident, residence is a question of fact."
Holmes asking about Bayne's testimony saying that Duffy spend $100k to make his PEI home a primary residence
On Calendar entry - Exhibit 7 -
Page 213 Called Eddie Baird/Clifford Dollar re: levelling cottage
Page 221 Eddie Baird arrives for cottage levelling
Page 223 Eddie Baird crew finishes forms, pours foundation, pay $10k
Page 224 Cheq 2 for Baird construction
Page 227 Write cheques to Baird Construction $19k
H: If he's renoing the cottage in 2012 to make it into primary residence, what was it before 2012?
A: We're talking about primary residence for financial purposes and not constitutional matters. Depends on what home you make improvements to: you can make improvements *to a* primary residence if it's already a primary residence... or you can make improvements *to make it a* primary residence. Depending on how you frame the question, you have your answer in your question.
Trial begins with defence raising an issue of untimely disclosure. Says he received new documents – a chapter from Senate Resources Guide – just before the trial began today. Crown be allowed to start examination, but judge says Defence will get appropriate break to allow them to come up-to-speed with new disclosure.
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 – Just been told witness will deal with Part 6 of it, which I’ve never seen. My concern is not only with this document, but behind the scenes there will be more documents.
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
Bayne – I’m certainly going to need some meaningful break, to consider this part of the document but the rest of the document that my client and I will see for the first time today.
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.
Neubauer - What we received this morning was the whole Senator Resource Guide. Witness today is Makhlouf, HR officer for the Senate. The chapter related to some of her work. … the info related to Chapter 4, the HR chapter, overlaps with what was released previously. … it’s essentially clarifying information.
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.
We are expecting to hear from Senate human resources official Sonia Makhlouf, to talk about senators awarding contracts
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).
26 JN: There are two budgets: HR and Finance budgets. / SM: Yes // JN: You’re here to today to talk about HR deals with these budgets? / SM: Yes
JN: generally the amount in the budget was between $149k and 169k/year in the 2008-2013 years *** / SM: probably, I can’t confirm.
SM: There’s an administrative process to obtain those funds.
JN: Process to access these funds – your involvement? / SM: “My involvement is services contract and hiring personnel.”
JN: are you assigned to specific Senators? / SM: Two HR personnel, split the responsibility. One responsible for last names A-L, and other responsible M-Z
JN: Let’s talk about service contracts. Take us through request process
SM: When senator wants to retain services of contractor, submit request to HR “Request for Services Contract” form, so this request should contain all info related to contract, services rendered, start/end date, amount to be paid, details of services, signed by senator. When request received, it’s stamped, given to me to be validated, reviewed, approved and processed.
JN: So what do you do when you rec’d request?
SM: Look at info, assess it, validate it, look at description of services, nature of services to be rendered, the amount to be paid, and if the info looks complete and I will approve the request and proceed with an agreement.
JN: You say you assess and validate the info. When it comes to name of contractor, do you validate the name?
SM: I don’t validate this information. This is at the discretion of the contractor ... simply check that the name is there.
JN: How you assess services to be rendered?
SM: I look at nature of the services. It’s whole of the services – the description – I compare it to be the fee to be paid. Speech writing, research, editing and other related to parliamentary work.