OTTAWA—Sen. Mike Duffy claimed he did not know where the money to repay his questionable expenses had come from until Ray Novak told him Nigel Wright had picked up the tab, according to emails released in court Monday.

On May 16, 2013, Chris Woodcock, then director of issues management in the Prime Minister’s Office, forwarded Duffy a CTV News story that confirmed Wright, who was then chief of staff to Stephen Harper, had provided Duffy with the $90,172 he needed to repay the disputed claims.

That story, published online the day before, said Duffy had originally told CTV News in an email May 13 that he had repaid the expenses with a bank loan and that Wright “played no role.”

“Is your quote below taken out of context?” Woodcock, whose job it was to help manage the political fallout from the Senate expenses scandal, asked Duffy in the email.

Duffy, who has pleaded not guilty to 31 charges, including bribery, fraud and breach of trust, replied to Woodcock by email that it had.

“Because I did not know until Ray Novak told me that Nigel (had) given the money. I was told I would be made whole. I said I did not want to know the name of the donor because I did not want to be beholding (sic) to anyone,” Duffy said in the May 16 email released Thursday.

“I negotiated the loan and Heather (Duffy’s wife) cosigned. I wrote the cheque and some time later a credit appeared in my account,” Duffy wrote in the email.

Duffy does not say in the email, which was sent after the news became public, when it was that Novak told him this.

The original agreement, according to testimony and court documents, was to have the Conservative party cover Duffy’s expenses, but that part of the plan fell part when it was discovered the senator owed nearly three times as much as originally thought.

Novak, who was principal secretary to Harper at the time, is now his chief of staff, a role he assumed after Wright left the job several days after it emerged he had provided the cheque.

Conservative campaign spokesman Kory Teneycke, who did not respond to an emailed request for comment Monday, told reporters earlier this month Novak learned about the payment when Harper did.

Woodcock testified Monday that he also did not read an email from Wright telling him directly about his plan to pay for the expenses.

The emails released Monday also show Duffy consulted with a lawyer about whether to disclose the $90,172 payment from Wright to Senate Ethics Officer Lyse Ricard.

He was advised to seek her opinion on the matter.

On May 15, 2013, lawyer Chris Rootham told Duffy he believed one could make “a good argument” that the payment from Wright was not a gift but instead income from a contract, according to the email, and that would leave him one year to disclose the nature, but not the amount, to Ricard.

“I know that this is not terribly helpful: it means that eventually you have to disclose, and eventually the nature of the payment (though not the amount) will become public,” Rootham wrote in the email released by the court Monday.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

Rootham also warned Duffy of the “more serious risk” that someone would allege he had violated Section 16(1) of the Parliament of Canada Act.

“Somebody could allege that you received compensation for services rendered (paying back the allowance) in respect of a “controversy” before the Senate. If this allegation is made, IF YOU SPEAK AT ALL you will deny that you received compensation in respect of a controversy before the Senate that any arrangement that was made was bona fide and legal,” Rootham advised Duffy in the email.

Rootham concluded by suggesting Duffy seek an opinion directly from Ricard.

“The benefits of doing so are (1) you get ahead of any controversy about this; and (2) the Senate Ethics Officer is required by the Code to stick by the advice given to you,” Rootham wrote in the email.

Duffy then forwarded the email to Woodcock and Wright.

The emails submitted as evidence include the draft of a letter from Duffy to Ricard, which states that he had, at first, considered the $90,172 as “reimbursement of travel and living expenses — and exempt from disclosure because it was paid for by a member of my political party,” Duffy wrote in the letter dated May 15, 2013.

Duffy went on to write that after more consideration, he was “unsure about this conclusion,” and asks Ricard to advise him on whether it should be considered “sponsored travel,” or disclosed as a gift or as income, or none of the above.

“In the event that you conclude that this payment must be disclosed, I would like the opportunity to discuss with you the extent of the information that will be contained in the public disclosure summary in respect of this matter,” Duffy wrote in the letter.

It is unclear from the emails released Monday whether Duffy ever sent the letter to Ricard.

A spokeswoman for Ricard did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday afternoon.

Read more about: