News Sections
Mulroney explains cash payments from Schreiber
CTV News Video
Watch: See all Videos in the Player
Font-size:
Share
Print
Comments(140)
CTV.ca News Staff
Date: Thu. Dec. 13 2007 11:12 PM ET
Former prime minister Brian Mulroney appeared before a Commons ethics committee today and admitted that it was a mistake to accept cash payments from Karlheinz Schreiber in exchange for his consulting services. However, he said none of his actions were illegal.
The ethics committee is probing why Mulroney accepted cash -- which Schreiber claims amounted to $300,000 -- shortly after leaving office in 1993.
Mulroney told the committee he was actually paid $225,000 in three payments of $75,000.
"My second biggest mistake in life, for which I have no one to blame but myself, is having accepted payments in cash from Karlheinz Schreiber for a mandate he gave me after I left office," Mulroney said in an opening statement.
"... my biggest mistake in life, by far, was ever agreeing to be introduced to Karlheinz Schreiber in the first place."
Schreiber has alleged that the pair agreed in principle to work together in June 1993 at Harrington Lake -- when Mulroney was still in office.
But Mulroney denied ever making a deal to work for Thyssen Industries or any other client of Schreiber while he was serving as prime minister.
He also denied ever receiving money for services relating to the purchase by Air Canada from Airbus of 34 aircraft in 1998.
Cash payments
Mulroney said the first payment he received from Schreiber was on Aug. 27, 1993 at a hotel in Mirabel, Que. -- after he left the prime minister's office. (However, he was still an MP at this time.)
He said Schreiber initially expressed annoyance at the meeting that the government, which Mulroney had headed, had not approved the Bear Head project. The project involved a plan by Thyssen Industries to construct a factory to build light-armoured vehicles in Canada.
"(He) told me he had planned to pursue legal damages to recover costs and damages, he left me with a copy of the lawsuit," said Mulroney.
"He then said that it would be very helpful to Thyssen to have a former prime minister assist in the international promotion of their peacekeeping vehicles and gave me a copy of merchandising documents regarding the vehicle."
Mulroney then said Schreiber wanted to retain him for international representation.
"When I indicated that this kind of global activity was something I thought I could usefully do -- provided that none of the activity would relate to domestic Canadian representation -- he produced a legal sized envelope and handed it to me," said Mulroney.
"At that point, Mr. Schreiber said this is the first retainer payment -- he told me there would be a total of three payments for three years."
Mulroney said he hesitated when he realized it was cash.
"When I hesitated, he said 'I'm an international businessman and I only deal in cash, this is the way I do business,'" said Mulroney.
"When I look back on it today I realize I made a serious error of judgment in receiving a payment in cash for this assignment even though it was decidedly not illegal to do so."
Mulroney said he only used the retainer for expenses while promoting Schreiber's interests internationally.
"After accepting the international payment on the retainer, and during the time two subsequent payments were made, I made trips to China, Russia, Europe and throughout the United States of America where I met with government and industry leaders and explored with them the prospects for this peacekeeping vehicle," said Mulroney.
Schreiber has testified that the cash was to help with the original plans to build the light-armoured vehicle plant in Canada.
Schreiber, facing extradition to Germany on fraud charges, is suing Mulroney to recover the money.
Mulroney says he paid tax on the money only after Schreiber was arrested in 1999 on corruption charges.
He told the MPs that was because the arrest "put in serious doubt my relationship with him.'' Asked if he would have paid the taxes had Schreiber not been arrested, Mulroney said: "Well I don't know the answer to that sir."
Airbus affair
Two years after the agreement, Mulroney said his "world almost ended with the publication of the false and defamatory letter to Switzerland by the government of Canada in the Airbus matter."
"Mr. Schreiber was also accused in the same letter to the Swiss -- obviously, all of my retainer work came to an abrupt and immediate halt."
In 1988, Air Canada -- then a Crown corporation -- bought 34 Airbus jets worth $1.8 billion.
Mulroney sued for defamation after the letter -- linking him to kickbacks in the deal -- was leaked in 1995.
In 1997, Jean Chretien's Liberal government paid Mulroney a $2.1-million settlement.
The Liberals apologized to Mulroney for the "letter of request" but not for the actual RCMP investigation, which ended six years later without charges.
Mulroney said after the letter was leaked he instructed his advisors to contact the income tax authorities to ensure that the full amount received from Schreiber for the Thyssen consulting work was reported by him as income. He said all applicable taxes were paid on the cash payments.
Mulroney also addressed an apparent contradiction to sworn testimony he made in his $2.1 million Airbus settlement -- in which he claimed to have had no prior dealings with Schreiber.
"Any reasonable reading of my testimony indicates that, when I used the language... 'I had never had any dealings with Mr. Schreiber,'... I was clearly referring to the sale of Airbus aircraft at the time that I was in government," said Mulroney.
Mulroney made several points "clearly and unequivocally" to the committee.
He said:
- He never received "a cent" from anyone for services rendered to anyone in connection with purchase by Air Canada from Airbus of 34 aircraft in 1988.
- He didn't receive any money from Thyssen Industries or any other client of Mr. Schreiber while he was in office.
- He "never had a lawyer in Geneva or elsewhere in Switzerland except to defend myself against the false charges laid against me in in 1995."
- He never had a bank account in Switzerland.
- Neither he, nor anyone on his behalf, ever asked Mr. Schreiber or his lawyer to perjure themselves or otherwise lie about the payments received from him.
User Tools
Related Stories
CTV Broadband Network
Mulroney Testifies
Watch Brian Mulroney's testimony before the ethics committee right here on demand.
CTV Broadband Network
The Verdict
One admission and a number of refutals: Paula Todd talks with lawyers and colleagues about the testimony of Brian Mulroney.
User Tools
About the tools
Need to get in touch with CTV? You can email the CTV web team using the 'Feedback' button.
-


Font-size
Print Article
Comments(140)-
Feedback
Share it with your network of friends
Share this CTV article or feature with your friends. Click on the icon for your favourite social networking or messaging system, and follow the prompts.
Most Viewed News Stories
Most Talked about Stories
I applaud the budget, even though Health Care and education may stay unscathed. Sadly this cannot last and I worry to later this year where cuts will become enviable. If anything, this provides the Wildrose Alliance plenty of ammo when an election is called.


Comments are now closed for this story
Mike R.
said
JDC
said
Yves
said
Stephen B
said
Dwayne
said
Paul
said
FreakAlert
said
Michael (Ottawa)
said
Canadians expect our committee members to accord Mr. Mulroney the same RESPECT and latitude without the preface comments which are designed to taint the former PM.
SHAME on SZABO & his Liberals!
EMG
said
FN
said
We're wasting millions of our tax dollars to find out something that we already know. The former PM didn't get kickbacks for the AC plane deal.
Let's quit this and get on with the business of the country.
BlairJ
said
Peter Friesen
said
CraigW in Ontario
said
I guess birds of a feather flock together.
HRDC, ADSCAM, and whatever other criminal activities the Fiberals were involved with, can make them come to the aid of a fellow criminal and crook.
Mr Mulroney should be left alone and Karlheinz should be put on an Airbus and sent back to Germany to face charges and justice.
Scott
said
Sean
said
And yet somebody here says "shame on the Liberals"??
The more I read the comments on CTV the more I think a pack of partisans from the PM's office dive-bomb these comment sections on a daily basis.
Bill
said
Schreiber more believable than Mulroney: poll
I have to agree with the poll
Edb
said
Roch
said
M-J
said
It is time to send Karlheinz Schreiber home to face his charges. Only 6% care about this, and yet, this committee isn't listening to the other 94%
Raymond
said
Jake
said
As for you Michael, obviously you haven't been paying much attention. First of all, the committee is formed with ALL parties, not just the Liberals, so get your facts straight.
dwayne-ottawa
said
Throw the book at him if found guilty. Make him pay all taxes and fines owned. AFTER all us ordinary people would not be treated this nice would we?? Ordinary people GO TO JAIL, its time to end the status quo where the wealthy walk around clapping their hands and the poor middle class get marched off in cuffs.
Gregory Boudreau
said
retep
said
Gord
said
The Government of Canada should immediately deport this guy and stop wasting OUR dollars to keep him here.
When is the smear campaign against Mr. Mulroney going to end? The previous Liberal Government has already acknowledged they were wrong to the tune of 2.1 million dollars. GET OVER IT!!
Allan Eizinas
said
Ridiculous!
You accept hundreds of thousands of dollars in $1000 bills (who deals in $1000 bills?), you place them into a safety deposit box in your house and don’t declare it as income for a few years and then as a previous Prime Minister you call it an “error in judgment”?
Holly
said
The smear tactics of the Liberals make me sick. Can we get on with the business of this country and stop trying to smear everything and everybody. These tactics make the Liberal look so petty and childish.
Ken in Moncton
said
Michael Popowich
said
andré
said
John R McTaggart
said
Wouldn't the telling tale be to see if he claimed such largess on his income tax for the tax year.
If yes, no problem. If No, then call him scareface and toss him to the lions
Bob
said
Fishing trip is over...extradite Schreiber now!
said
J.C,
said
LFB
said
When will we learn some respect?
Former Prime Minister Mulroney (and his family) has earned and deserves Canadians' support.
There is much to be accomplished in this Country. Let's get on with it!
Nick B
said
Let's assume that the money really was received after his tenure as PM. And anyway, since it was cash then it can't be proven when the transaction actually happened!
Okay, Mulroney made a mistake in judgement but I'm not seeing what is/was illegal.
TK
said
Unimpressed Canadian
said
boomer
said
GW
said
Nothing to see hear folks, just another smear campaign by a bunch of weasely lawyers, unless of course you enjoy Tabloid Politics.
Berle L. Eberle
said
Pablo
said
DougD
said
I am so glad the old guard of Mulroney, Chretien & Martin are gone & soon to be forgotten.
Blair J
said
The rules and regulations of the Canadian Revenue Agency apply to all Canadians - as does the presumption of innocence until proven otherwise by supportable facts and evidence - not smears and innuendos leveled by unsubstantiated ramblings of a person doing whatever possible to avoid extradition and a political circus set on accomplishing nothing except scoring a few perceived political points.
Professional Accountant
said
If BM, for whatever reason, did not pay the tax until later under an arrangement with CRA, then his proper tax would be the regular tax plus interest. It has been reported that several thousand Canadians availed themselves of this provision in the same year as BM.
Suggestions that he should go to jail like poor Canadians just don't fit the facts. In Canada, CRA only jails for severe income tax evasion.
If fiberals and NDP must tar BM, them get your facts right!
Adam S., Ottawa
said
Vincent
said
The bottom line is, if it's possible that the law was broken, you need to be investigated especially if you are the Prime Minister. In order for it to get this far you need to have at least some evidence or questions to be determined. In this case Mulroney CLEARLY has contradicted himself on several issues and there are still many unanswered questions.
Why has Mulroney's story changed? Originally he never had any dealings with Schreiber, now he says he didn't have any dealings about Airbus specifically. Well why didn't he testify to that before? That he did have dealings but not about Airbus. He has previously said the money from Schreiber was for a "pasta" business. Now we find out it was for armoured vehicles. Something is not right with Mulroney's statements and contradictions so the government has a duty to investigate. Anything less they would not be doing there jobs. It's not about being partisan.
Allowing abuse of the PMO undermines our entire system and needs more scrutiny.
Stefan K
said
Craig
said
Darren
said
Gair
said
Mr. Mulroney is a lawyer!! Hello Cash payments?
Does he expect us to believe he did not know what he was doing taking cash from an arms dealer?
And somehow this is not related to his now obvious purgery from the air Bus inquiry. Maybe Mr. Mulroney should refund the goverment the amount of money we paid him for "wrongfully smearing his good name".
Neil
said
Vince M
said
(a) It is not illegal to accept money in cash form. (b) You do not need to report a retainer to cover expenses as income until it is used, which Mulrooney did.
As much as I detest the guy nothing illegal has happened here and we are going to fork over millions to re-discover that.
Pierre
said
Craig
said
And he didn't claim the money as income on his taxes until Schreiber got caught in 1999!! I "missed" a couple hundred bucks on my taxes and the feds got me and found it!! What kind if guy is this Mulroney?!!
Keith in Brampton
said
I really can't stand Mulroney, but I fail to see the point in this exercise. Schreiber is obviously willing to play fast and loose with the truth, and if Mulroney DID do something wrong, he's not likely to admit it now. So unless both men are willing to get hooked up to a polygraph, we have no hope of ever getting past "Shreiber said" / "Mulroney said".
Let's stop wasting our money and move on.
Carlo Dimarco
said
Desperate HouseWife OOPs. Desperate Ex-Prime Minister episode live. Enjoyed the drama.
Jonathan Westphal
said
John Timmermans
said
Scott
said
hilary
said
Leroy
said
Norm
said
I suggest that "he or she who is without 'sin" cast the first stone".
Gabby in QC
said
This indicates two things:
1. They do not really believe in the "presumption of innocence" section (11d of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom), since they clearly demonstrated their minds are already made up.
2. This entire exercise is being called an "inquiry" whereas it's proving to be nothing more than a muckraking exercise designed to further sully Mr. Mulroney's name.
Al M
said
Lart from Above
said
Taking the cash is a minor point. Not declaring it is highly questionable. He should have walked it straight to the bank and made sure his accountant had a good and clear record of the transactions. Not that one can necessarily believe the testimony given to Parliament, but the visible facts speak for themselves.
Les C
said
Irene
said
gdouglas
said
frodad
said
bernine M
said
debbie
said
Gary J
said
"Those of you who think there is something illegal about taking money should take a basic accounting course.
(a) It is not illegal to accept money in cash form. (b) You do not need to report a retainer to cover expenses as income until it is used, which Mulrooney did.
As much as I detest the guy nothing illegal has happened here and we are going to fork over millions to re-discover that."
Vince, you should take a basic law course. Bringing more than $10,000 in cash across the border without declaring it IS illegal (except, of course, for a "privileged few"). It's interesting that BM didn't address that issue.
Barb S.
said
I watched the proceedings and was not impressed by the partisan politics. The committee let Schriber talk on and on at great length, hoping to get something juicy. The committee did not allow Mulroney adequate time to offer a context within which to respond to a question. I'm disappointed a former Prime Minister was treated so badly; one I never voted for.
John T
said
If you think it is a waste of time, then don't read up on it, and don't post.
This isn't about us vs them, it is about finding out the truth the way civilized democracies are supposed to. It's a service we get for paying our taxes.
Rafael Landaverde
said
"When I hesitated, he said 'I'm an international businessman and I only deal in cash, this is the way I do business,'" said Mulroney.
Vince M
said
Bringing more than $10,000 in cash across the border without declaring it has been a long time US law but not a Canadian one at the time. Regardless,
wouldn't that be Schreiber's problem, not BM's? That is of course unless you believe Mirabel, Quebec is not part of Canada.
Adriana
said
Al in Cranbrook
said
The Libs and Dippers want to drag this out now to the next committee meeting on Jan. 28...you know, just before the Libs plan to bring down Harper's government.
Talk about your "hidden agenda" or what!
The do anything, say anything Liberals once again demonstrate their readiness to set new lows in their quest for power at any cost.
I hope Harper sends Schreiber packing, and brings all of this shameless garbage to an end.
Dave from Estevan
said
Nick B
said
Cheap baseless judgments....
said
1) Mulroney broke no rules of Parliament,
2) He did nothing illegal,
3) Taking cash is NOT illegal, (maybe not wise, but not illegal)
4) He didn't have to declare income until it was earned.
Much as some people would like to rush to judgment without just cause, Mulroney deserves respect and I accept his testimony as delivered compared to Schreiber's many
contrary statements under oath. This committee is far to partisan to be given a fair shake. I prefer they end it now or send it to a proper inquiry.
Geoffrey
said
Reg Volk
said
Meetings in different hotels.
In differenet places.
No taxes paid for years.
And then Mulroney claims he thought Schreiber was "Just an international arms dealer." despite Schreiber helping Mulroney win the Conservarive leadership years ago.
So who is being "duped"?
Rojan
said
Geoff
said
Betty
said
Eric
said
I'd like to remind -them- that it was Liberal and NDP members who hounded Harper to hold this inquiry. Harper relented eventually, after warning the opposition parties that this would turn into a debacle... which, go figure, it has!
So while Harper started this inquiry, it was in order to cease the demands of the Liberals and NDP to hold an inquiry.
Startin' to look to me like Harper was right about not bringing this up again... but what do I know? I'm clearly a covert Conservative 'spy' hired to spread my filthy lies.
kate
said
John
said
A Matter of Personal Character...
said
He may not have done anything illegal but business dealings involving large amounts of cash isn't proper just for the optics alone. We expect more integrity and character from our leaders.
Peter G. - Pointe aux Roches
said
LindaL
said
Cynthia - Ottawa
said
One of our Prime Ministers, has admitted to accepting $$$ in an envelope from a business person, for consulting, without any paperwork or contract. He accepted this CASH more than once, and did not deposit it anywhere, but kept it in safes and safety deposit boxes.
He did not keep records on his expenses, or have any deliverables, as part of this consulting deal!!!!!
He paid tax on the entire amount when Schreiber was arrested, and did not deduct any allowable expenses.
He had previously denied dealing with Schreiber...under oath. That deal cost us taxpayers over $$$2 Million.
Mulroney was the PM. He ran the country. How likely is it that he was dumb enough to think that CASH in an envelope in a hotel room with no contract or paperwork is an acceptable way of doing business???
And how dumb are we to defend and accept this type of activity???
Stephen F
said
LindaL
said
RRO
said
My guess is that had it been a Liberal government he would have talked about dealings with Liberals.
Since it is a Conservative government he is talking about Mulroney.
Thanks to the Professional Accountant for that information, that was my reading of the tax code as well.
This is all partisan politics aided by a small man trying to stay in Canada and made worse by what APPEARS to be illigal activity but is all just appearance.
I actually feel bad for Mr. Mulrony. I wonder when the Liberals will get around to investigating Martin and Chretien as well or even Trudeau since we are digging up history.
Clarification for Reg Volk
said
Rod
said
dale worsfold
said
a. brian mulroney
b. karl-heinz schreiber
the answer would be
c. neither of the above
James C
said
Clearly this is all about scoring politcal points by the opposition but in the end we as Canadians all loose. We look ridiculous in the eyes of the world for spending so much time and money on such a lame issue.
The politicians should focus on running the country as a representatives of the people and forge this petty political point scoring, or we should vote them out.
Ron McAllister
said
B. Garner
said
David
said
Tim
said
I fail to understand the logic considering the Conservative party is NOT the Progressive Conservative party. Different parties from two completely different eras.
Ken in Moncton
said
Barry
said
If you watch the entire testimony of Brian Mulroney before the Commons Ethics Committee it is apparent that there was no illegal activity on the part of Brian Mulroney.
Leave the man alone and quit wasting taxpayers money. The partisan politics at work here is disgusting.
Cynthia - Ottawa
said
I also don't expect to be given some stupid story, about accepting an envelope of money, because Mulroney didn't know better.
Is this perhaps the tip of the iceberg????
Ian Kluge
said
What this whole thing has shown is that Canadians have absolutely nothing to feel superior about vis-a-vis American politics. We're right down there in the mud with them.
Pete
said
What is it GIC? Lets get there documents.
Is it just me or isn't kind of odd how the Conservatives are trying to downplay all of this?
Dick Varley
said
Rich
said
Are you serious? The guy did anything but do what was in the best interest of Canadians! He was there for himself his own self interests and no one else! If you are that blind maybe think about not voting in the next election because all these politicians are there for themselves and their own self-interests (financial). What other job gives a full lifetime pension after only 6 years on the job? Name one . . . please! I would also like to know what you have to say to those who lost their jobs in the softwood lumber industry? So much for free trade . . . eh!?
D USA
said
Are the people e mailing to this site real?
RAV
said
Joe
said
It would cost a mere few thousand dollars.
Dave
said
I am afraid for our country if such activities are acceptable to the public. Where are the ethics, morals ?
R. A. Hicks
said
When a comment is added, the IP address of the source should be recorded and displayed along with the comment. That would allow the identification of the organization that "owns" the IP address associated with the comment. If that capability exposed a concerted propaganda campaign by party hacks by showing a flood of comments from IPs owned by the government, the resulting publicity should help suppress such propaganda.
Chris
said
If we are going on this witch hunt for one, let's investigate all ex polititians to find out how they all accumalated so much wealth (maybe not all have) after leaving office or from the time they were elected to the time people got wise and turfed them out.
Enough of spending taxpayers money again, lets get on with governing as we elected these people for in the first place.
Francesco G
said
Benjamin
said
DANIEL
said
proud canadaian
said
Delta Lori
said
He's pretty smooth but he has a lot to answer for.
Re:Clarification for Reg Volk
said
Morvin
said
Why would someone who professes to be telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth refuse to be sworn in as a witness?
Is it to avoid being charged with perjury when the truth is finally revealed?
CB
said
Mark - Fort Erie Ontario
said
Liz
said
Let Canadians decide if they believe Mulroney. What's another poll when Harper has already spent $31 million in less than 2 years. Harper released the Paille report today, and it doesn't look good...
Tried to sneak it under the Mulroney kerfuffle. Didn't work
P. Weed
said
Greg
said
I think you are right. Judging from the comments on different issues in this forum I believe all parties have loyalists watching and trying to sway opinions. Blair's comment would be a prime example. To use integrity and the word honorable in the same sentence when describing Brian Mulroney or any politician for that matter is ludicrous.
Ron
said
A D
said
If it doesn"t look right, it usually isn't
Moe
said
What a joke! Way to go Liberals and NDP....
C.G.Ouimet
said
ET
said
Joshi. N
said
He makes it look like he was working internationally when in fact it was to justify his failure to pay the GST. Anyone with common sense knows that he is not a salesperson. He says that he approached foreign countries such as China, Europe and USA when in fact he didn't have anything to present. If you want to sell something you have to have product or the prototype first.
BM is not a salesperson. What has BM sold for Canada? Nothing. The Germans don’t need us to sell the product for them. Just see the success of BMW, Mercedes Benz, VW, and Siemens. They are far superior.
BM was approached for one reason-to influence the political process to set up a plant in Canada.
BM says that hesitated receiving huge sum of money in cash but took it nevertheless. Any prudent person with a legal training he had would have walked away from such a deal. The fact he didn’t shows that he wanted keep the whole thing a secret. After all he didn’t need any favours. He could have demanded payment by check, draft or money order, but didn’t. That shows that BM is less than honest.
Lourens Wierenga
said
Deposit of cash in a Safety Deposit Box: reason could be that a large deposit of Cash in a Bank Account, could require the Depositor to declare the origin and purpose of the Cash deposit. Then, why not deposit it in a Safety Deposit Box. Nothing to declare!
Just a thought for you to pursue.
Lourens.
Ted B.
said
Gail Thomas
said
Eric
said
"The more I read the comments on CTV the more I think a pack of partisans from the PM's office dive-bomb these comment sections on a daily basis."
Coincidence, unoriginality or script?