►SENATE
Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration: Senators meet today and again tomorrow morning to consider the expenses question. An independent audit of Pamela Wallin's travel and housing expenses is expected to be released Tuesday, according to reports.
Wallin has left the Conservative caucus to sit as an independent during the audit process. She told reporters that $38,000 has been repaid so far.
Nova Scotia Conservative Gerald Comeau has replaced David Tkachuk as committee chair.
►Senators on the committee questioned Gary Timm of Deloitte about the Wallin audit on June 13. Timm said the auditors were waiting for third-party information:
Senator Downe: Two meetings ago I asked you when we could anticipate receiving the audit of Senator Wallin, and I believe you indicated in the first answer that it would not take that long. I then asked whether it would be before we rise in June, and you said that would not be a problem. Is that a problem now and, if so, why?
Mr. Timm: In terms of the timing, we provided a letter, which I believe the whole committee has, that sets out the reasoning, where we are at and where we will be going to. That letter, I believe, sets out the reasons therein.
Senator Downe: I am wondering what changed since your original answer to me two meetings ago. You indicate in your letter that you are waiting for some third party who is unidentified. Would that be hotel receipts or things like that? What is the delay? You are a very large firm. The question is, why not put the resources on the file to meet the objective that you told us you would achieve at the end of June?
Mr. Timm: There are a couple of things. If we were to look at the letter itself, there are a couple of things within it. One is that just recently we have been asked to do the latter three months, if you will, complete the full period, so that itself was just a recent addition to look at.
Senator Downe: Just on that, did that come from the steering committee, chair, since the previous meetings?
The Chair: Yes.
Senator Downe: Thank you.
Mr. Timm: As well, we are working as diligently as we can on this. As it notes here, there is some third party information we are awaiting. Unfortunately, we have been advised that it should be in hopefully by the end of this month. There are some things that are beyond our control, if you will, to work on. Every intention was to try to get it by the end of this month for you, as I had pointed out. Unfortunately, in these processes, things do come up that extend the time. That is really what it is.
Just on your point, we do have the same resources. Again, in these projects there are only so many resources you should put to them as well to make sure we have consistency throughout.
Senator Downe: I have a final question, chair.
What are the dates on the last three months you have been asked to review?
Mr. Timm: As it points out in the letter, January 2009 to March 2009.
Senator Downe: The last part of my question is this: Assuming the third parties that are you waiting to hear from provide the information by the end of June, what is your opinion now of when this committee would receive the audit of Senator Wallin?
Mr. Timm: Again, as indicated in the letter, the timing would be basically we should be able to finish our report by mid-July, but then it has to go to translation, which as we understand will be 7 to 10 business days, which would take it to the end of July, basically, for it to be provided to this committee, translated both into English and into French.
Senator Downe: Could we ask the auditors, if they do not receive the information by the end of June, to advise us?
The Chair: Sure, absolutely.
Senator Downe: The information I am hearing now is that as of August 1 we are likely to have the report, but if their information is delayed and it will move back to a later date, I would like to be advised of that.
The Chair: Yes; that is good. There is no problem. I am sure they will.
Senator Furey: Thank you for coming this morning, gentlemen.
Mr. Timm, when you and your colleagues appeared before the steering committee back in April, there was a third auditor present. I had the impression, perhaps erroneously, that he was the lead auditor on Senator Wallin's file; am I correct?
Mr. Timm: Actually that was Alan Stewart. He is a fellow partner of mine. The two of us are leading the files. Unfortunately, Alan is out of the country today. He is still working on this file. Peter Dent is our national leader of the practice, so I brought him with me today.
Senator Furey: No problem; I just wanted to clarify that.
Can you tell the committee whether the process you are following now for Senator Wallin is the exact same process you used for the other audits that the Senate asked you to do?
Mr. Timm: In terms of this review that we are undertaking, the overall audit process is the same; however, the lens that we are looking at is slightly different in terms of our review in this matter.
Senator Furey: Are you telling us that you have gone into more detail? What do you mean by a different lens?
Mr. Timm: In terms of the other reports we had done around living allowances when we were engaged, we are now looking at Senator Wallin’s expenses. The lens was more on the nature of the expenses and whether they were Senate business expenses. That is the different lens.
Senator Furey: Thank you.
Senator Campbell: When you say that the process is much the same, I understand the differences in the expenses, but are you finished investigating Senator Harb?
Mr. Timm: We have issued our three final reports on the other three senators at this point.
Senator Campbell: There has been a figure quoted in the press. Is that a correct figure of $231,000?
Mr. Timm: In terms of that number, we have not had any involvement in that number.
Senator Campbell: What number do you have?
Mr. Timm: Again, we have not prepared any numbers. Those calculations were provided after our report was issued.
Senator Campbell: You gave a number and then you were asked by the subcommittee to go back in time on Senator Harb.
Sorry, my apologies; our recommendation to the Senate was that you go back in time.
The Chair: That was not it either.
Senator Campbell: Our report said that here is what we found and we would like you to go back and investigate further.
The Chair: Senator Marshall, do you want to answer that?
Senator Marshall: Yes, we recommended that before April of 2011 someone go back and review it, but we did not recommend that Deloitte do it. Probably the chair can indicate, but my understanding was that Senate staff was to do that work. We did not specify who we wanted to do that work. We just wanted someone to do it, and if the audit staff at the Senate were doing it, that was up to —
Senator Campbell: My question is if you go back seven years and you have those figures, how much tougher is it to go back three months, but since you did not do that, I apologize for that line. Thank you very much.
Senator Cordy: I did ask in camera if we could have a pool camera for the media. Perhaps next time we can make sure that there is a Senate camera for the media for at least having a visual.
Does the audit go back to the date of the senator's appointment to the Senate?
The Chair: Yes, I think so.
Mr. Timm: The answer is yes, and that is why the extra three months were added on, to take it back to the appointment date.
Senator Cordy: You speak in your letter and you spoke to Senator Downe earlier about the third party, without being specific as to who the third parties are. Are you receiving cooperation from the third parties where you need information?
Mr. Timm: Yes, we are.
-Andrew Thomson
Latest Comments