Article content continued

Photo by Colin Perkel/CP; Tyler Anderson/National Post

But, alas, the minister of energy, then Chris Bentley, and his office had told the committee it had no relevant documents.

That, as Wallace said in his polite way, “was not particularly credible,” given the volumes of disclosure that was coming from the public service.

“The issue of documents and disclosure to the committee was a dominant issue in cabinet” and a “central focus in the premier’s office.”

At first, Wallace said, the initial response from the public service and the OPA was to question whether the demanded disclosure was “fully required.”

To that end, he consulted a number of lawyers, inside and outside government, and “the universally clear answer was that the order (from the committee) took precedence” to everything else — privacy legislation, solicitor-client privilege, commercial confidentiality.

“From a legal perspective,” Wallace said, “there was absolutely no choice. We were required to provide without question the requested disclosure.”

Yet there he was, stuck with this “stark contrast” between the response of the public service and the political side of government.

It was, as he said, a hugely tense time, what with the opposition parties baying and the gas plants issue all over the news, an enormous amount of disclosure from the public service, yet curiously, none from the energy minister or other “political actors.”

“I am quite frankly very concerned that the office of the premier had not understood or wilfully ignored the legal requirements” of the committee’s order, Wallace said.