Perrin wrote to Wright on March 1 that this was the first he had heard from Payne that the Deloitte work would no longer be needed if Duffy repaid the Kanata expenses. Wright's response: I don't care about her expectations. From what I hear, her client is making this more difficult."
Perrin spoke to Payne on the phone that day and reported back that he told her it wasn't acceptable to make statements that are broader than what was agreed to. I believe he qualified his tone as assertive (sorry, that's the word in my head but it flew by fast).
Perrin says he was frustrated because he had been clear so many times with Payne. He says he was firmer in his language. He felt Payne was trying to create a written record there that wasn't accurate. Recall that PMO insisted on no written agreement about the terms of Duffy's repayment.
On March 5, Payne emailed Perrin and Conservative Party lawyer Arthur Hamilton with the letter she was considering sending to Deloitte following a conversation between Tkachuk and Duffy.
The letter asked Deloitte to confirm that Duffy would be withdrawn from the review/audit. She followed up by phone the next day and left Perrin a message. He then flipped the email to Wright, Rogers, Woodcock and Novak.
We're jumping ahead now to March 14. Payne emailed Perrin at 735 a.m. asking for an update. Perrin doesn't think they've spoken since the last round. He responded to her to hold tight, she replied that she had some suggestions from Duffy for media lines, and Perrin told Payne that Duffy shouldn't change the lines. These are the lines from Feb. 22.
On March 20, Payne emailed Perrin and Hamilton that the Feb. 22 arrangement was in limbo. LeBreton had told senators the day before that no one should raise questions about Deloitte, and Duffy wasn't sure how to read that. Perrin forwarded the email to Patrick Rogers, Nigel Wright, Ray Novak and Chris Woodcock.
Rogers responded he doesn't know anything about the March 19 reference and has been working w/ Senator Irving Gerstein, who was "trying to arrange the necessary commitments from Deloitte."
Perrin notes he had a side conversation with Wright at some point in March that he didn't think Deloitte would give up the audit. He said he made the point that audit firms are given mandates and complete them. Perrin says he felt uncomfortable even raising it with Wright because of Wright's superior business background.
This letter from Payne is what Wright called a "very dangerous tactic" in a March 20, 7:34pm email.
He said it wasn't about the audit being called off, but about Deloitte not having to come to a conclusion on primary versus secondary residence.
Perrin says he spoke to Payne the next day. Payne sent an email to Perrin on March 21: "given the lack of concrete result thus far and the ultimate objective... I see no reason not to send the message I suggested below to Deloitte."
Perrin wrote back that he just got an email on that issue and that he would get back to her the next day because everyone was in budget lock-up that day. The lock-up means media and staff give up their blackberries (and other smart phones) and can't communicate with the outside world.
I hadn't noticed that PMO staff also give up their blackberries for budget lock-ups.
Rogers responded re: Gerstein's talk with Deloitte: any repayments won't change Deloitte's conclusions because they were asked to opine on residency, but can't reach a conclusion on residency because Payne hadn't given them anything.
Perrin asked Rogers, Wright, Woodcock and Novak (the same group is on all of these emails) how to have Duffy engage with Deloitte. He noted Duffy and Payne would be very unhappy.
Perrin told the group that he thought they needed to share the Deloitte info "in good faith" and then explain why Duffy and Payne shouldn't do anything about it. Wright agreed. This led to the infamous March conference call. Perrin requests a break.
We're back! And going over emails we already covered, so not exactly at the conference call day yet.
This conference call is the one where Wright testified Novak was in and out, missing most of it, but where Perrin told police that he remembers looking at Novak to see how he reacted to Wright mentioning he was giving Duffy the money to repay the Senate expenses.
On March 20,in the "dangerous tactic by her" email from Wright, he wrote that Perrin had told Payne "several times" that this was not about the audit being called off, but about Deloitte not having to conclude on primary vs secondary residence. Perrin tells the court that that was Wright's description; he wouldn't describe it as telling Payne "several" times.
Perrin says he thought it would be unethical not to tell Payne and Duffy about the Deloitte info since they had been encouraging them not to deal with Deloitte.
Crown: why would you feel you had to approach Mr. Wright and explain the audit firm would follow through? Perrin: Because the contacts were being made through someone other than the principle who retained the firm.
Perrin: when an audit firm has an audit, they're not just going to call it off. They're not going to declare it moot..."there's nothing that will stop them. That's their most important obligation to their client."
Perrin says there was no discussion of that. Wright nodded his head or something similar. Crown: was that information ultimately provided in that March 22 phone call? Perrin: i don't recall.
Perrin: It's not my recollection that he shared or substantively conveyed the bullet points shared by Patrick Rogers (relating what Gerstein learned of the Deloitte audit).
Perrin had a call with Payne before the conference call. He says she told him that Senator Duffy was considering reneging on his public commitment to repay the disputed residency expense claims, that they continued to believe the rules were ambiguous and that they were seriously considering fighting it out with the auditors.
Perrin: they thought they could achieve a favourable outcome in the audit. They were planning on a dramatically different course of action than we understood would take place.
Perrin keeps trying to jump ahead to the call. The Crown is moving ahead methodically (or what I assume is methodically, since I am as eager as Perrin to get to the call).
Wright preferred Duffy not be on the call, but said if Payne wanted him there then they couldn't object (he didn't end up on the call). PMO would have some "silent partners," which Perrin said Wright - or his assistant, David Van Hemmen in his place - intended to be people on the call who Payne didn't know were listening in. That would be Woodcock and I think Van Hemmen.
The people on the call were to be Wright, Novak and Perrin, Perrin says. The call took place in Wright's office.
Perrin says he spoke to Wright just before the call. He forwarded the Feb. 22 email chain with the agreement and asked Van Hemmen to print it out for Wright.
Perrin noted points two through five weren't really issues, but one was still a problem - the audit. Perrin says he got to Wright's office in Langevin three or four minutes before the call and said Wright was at his desk. Perrin sat at his boardroom table. He says he remembers it vividly because there were so few occasions where they met in Wright's office.
Perrin briefed Wright on how he thought the call would go and which issues would be difficult to address. He says he conveyed the information from Payne the day or two before, that Duffy was considering reneging on his commitment to repay the expenses.
Perrin says Novak entered during the briefing and sat at the head of the table, to Perrin's right and Wright's left. Perrin concluded his briefing and told Wright Payne and Duffy would likely be incensed because of the audit going ahead and being about to make a finding of non-cooperation.
Perrin says Wright said Duffy would be going ahead with the repayment "because I'm going to be paying them" for him. Perrin says it was the first he'd heard of it and had never contemplated it. He says Novak had no reaction to that information, and the call started within a minute of that.
Perrin says Wright began the call by introducing himself. Perrin says it sounded like they'd never spoken. He says Wright also introduced Novak, then spoke for a few minutes. Perrin says once Wright got to the audit information, he was very clear that even though he'd committed to the audit being rendered moot, that that wasn't going to happen anymore.
Perrin recalls Wright saying the commitment that was originally made about the audit being declared moot wouldn't happen, and that the auditors would go ahead and file a report.
Wright then asked Payne what they intended to do, Perrin says. Payne repeated what she'd told Perrin the day before about considering reneging. She and Duffy thought they could achieve a favourable outcome, Perrin says.
Perrin said Wright said "Senator Duffy is going to go ahead and pay back that money because it's going to come out of my pocket." He says they went on to discuss how the money would be provided to Duffy.
Wright said he'd give the money to Payne in trust and that Duffy had to agree to irrevocably transfer the same amount to the receiver general of Canada, and then Payne could release the funds to Senator Duffy.
Perrin says that was about it for the call. He says Wright said he'd provide the cheque the next week. Payne was concerned about the interest accruing and Wright said he'd find out how much it was. Payne was to provide a letter for Wright to look at to accompany the cheque.
The call was booked for 20 minutes and didn't exceed that time, Perrin said. There was nothing else discussed on the call.
Bayne interjects. He feels Payne wouldn't have said "my client's going to renege" and wouldn't have said that they were going to fight it out with Deloitte. He wants the court to know what she actually said. The Crown says they aren't his words, they're the witnesses. The judge was going to allow it to continue but have Bayne question, but Perrin asks to clarify his own words.
Perrin says Payne said Duffy was not going to pay after all (or something along those lines). Perrin says Wright said that chances of that were nil because he was going to pay.
I hope somebody asks if Novak was there throughout the call. We have heard only that he was there before the call.
Crown asking Perrin if Payne mentioned her view that the rules were ambiguous after Wright said he'd repay. Perrin says no. Crown: did she say they would participate in the audit after Mr. Wright offered the money? Perrin: no.
Perrin said earlier they estimated tens of thousands of legal fees to participate in the audit, and that didn't come up again after Wright mentioned providing the money.
Crown: did Payne say anything about the potential for the senator not to repay after Wright mentioned he'd cover it? Perrin: No.
Perrin says Wright was the only one to speak on the call. He says Novak "was present throughout the call" but didn't speak either. So there we have it.
Perrin forwarded Payne a draft letter from Tkachuk's office about the audits and the amount owing. Payne emailed him the next day, Saturday March 23 about the cheque for Deloitte. She asked if she should instead send the cheque to internal economy with a cc to Deloitte.
Perrin says his last day of work was March 27, 2013, so he was moving that Saturday.
Payne also sent a draft of the cheque cover letter to Deloitte. Wright said it was fine with him and resisted making minor changes so they could say PMO didn't write it.
Payne emailed again on Sunday to advise that Duffy would follow the approach suggested by PMO on condition that if any senator sought his removal, Lebreton would urge the caucus to vote against it.
We are breaking for the day. Back tomorrow at 10 a.m. ET to continue with the Crown's case, with Perrin as witness.
Perrin wrote to Wright on March 1 that this was the first he had heard from Payne that the Deloitte work would no longer be needed if Duffy repaid the Kanata expenses. Wright's response: I don't care about her expectations. From what I hear, her client is making this more difficult."
Getting to day of conf call in which Wright & Perrin recall differently whether Novak was there. Blog here live.cbc.ca/Event/Mike_Duf… #duffyby Laura Payton via twitter 8/20/2015 7:37:04 PM
Perrin just described meeting w/Wright & Novak where Wright says he is covering #Duffy expenses. #elxn42by Jennifer Ditchburn via twitter retweeted by RosieBarton 8/20/2015 8:03:54 PM