ITQ Committee Lookahead: It’s Schrodinger’s witness list at this point

A quick rundown of the witnesses who may or may not appear during the second day of hearings on the Conservative in-and-out financing, depending on whether or not they have been told to decline the “invitation”, as has allegedly been the case for at least one potential witness, according to the committee clerk (ITQ will be there, even if the witnesses aren’t):

Morning session – 10am to noon

The following witnesses have been summoned, and are listed on the schedule for the morning session, but are not expected to appear:

Andre Laurin, official agent to Canadian Heritage Minister Josee Verner

Heidy Cornejo, official agent to Sylvie Boucher, parliamentary secretary to the Prime Minister

Marc Duval, official agent to Luc Harvey, MP (lLouis Hebert), who won his seat by less than a fifth of a percent

Henri Gagnon, official agent to Yves Laberge, unsuccessful Conservative candidate in Montmorency-Charlevoix-Haute Cote Nord

Afternoon session – 2pm to 5

The following two witnesses have been summoned and are listed on the schedule for the afternoon session, but are not expected to appear:

Ken Brownridge, official agent to Dick Harris

Michael Gilmore, official agent to Ron Cannan

Note: The following two witnesses are expected to appear:

David Marler, the Conservative candidate in Brome Mississquoi, and his official agent Geoffrey Webber

  • Marler claims that he was approached by two Quebec party organizers during the last campaign, but rejected the offer to take part in a transaction that one of the two men described as “just an in and out,” and, as a result, lost the chance to run for the party in the next election.

Sam Goldstein, who ran for the Conservatives against NDP Leader Jack Layton Olivia Chow during the last election, and his official agent Doug Lowry

  • In a sworn affidavit filed by Elections Canada as part of its application to search the party’s headquarters, Lowry stated that the party transferred $50,000 to the campaign during the last election and instructed him to list it as an advertising expense, despite the fact that there was “no discussion” on the advertising, or how it would benefit the candidate.

Looking for more?

Get the Best of Maclean's sent straight to your inbox. Sign up for news, commentary and analysis.