Skip to main content Start of content

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Tuesday, June 13, 1995



The Chair: I call the meeting to order. I see a quorum.

We're continuing our study in the subcommittee of what has been called the Heritage Front report of the Security Intelligence Review Committee. It has been a number of days since we last met on the subject. The crush of business at the justice committee has prevented us from continuing, but we are resuming today.

We have a witness here today. I would now move to recognize our witness, Elisse Hategan, who is in the company of Mr. Paul Copeland, her counsel, and Mr. Martin Thériault, the director of the Canadian Centre on Racism and Prejudice.

I would point out that Ms Hategan has volunteered to be a witness; she contacted the subcommittee through her counsel. We're grateful for her extending the offer, which we were pleased to take up. We believe it will assist us in getting a better perspective on the Heritage Front affair for the purpose of our own parliamentary review and report.

The witness may wish to make, and hopefully will make, an opening statement. We would like it confined to no longer than 15 minutes, and then we will proceed to questions from members.

With that, we can commence, Ms Hategan. Welcome. We would be pleased to hear your opening statement.

Excuse me, on a point of order.


Mr. Langlois (Bellechasse): Mr. Chairman, I simply want to know if Mr. Copeland is Mrs. Hategan's counsel.

The Chair: Yes.


I had mentioned that Mr. Copeland is the counsel for Ms Hategan.

Ms Hategan, you may continue.

Ms Elisse Hategan (Former Member, Heritage Front): I would like to thank the members for providing this opportunity to appear in front of the committee to address the issue of the Bristow affair.

For almost two years I was a member of the neo-Nazi Heritage Front. My family came to Canada nine years ago, when I was eleven years old, and settled in Toronto. Shortly afterwards my father, a retired schoolteacher, returned to Romania because he couldn't adjust to our new way of life and soon died.

My home life was not great, so at fourteen I ran away and was placed in a group home. That was where I first began to have prejudiced views towards some minority groups. After returning home a year later, I felt the need to talk about them with someone who would not condemn me. After watching an American TV tabloid show that profiled a white supremacist group called the Church of the Creator, I wrote them to have more information. They gave me the phone number of the Heritage Front in Toronto. I joined them in the fall of 1991 when I was sixteen and remained a member until the fall of 1993.

Starting in the winter of 1992, I first became aware of a massive terror campaign on our group's part, targeting anti-racist groups and individuals. It was launched by the head of the Heritage Front intelligence, Grant Bristow. Front members and supporters were approached and encouraged to go after designated targets. I was one of those approached by Grant Bristow.

In the first weeks of January 1993 several individuals would get phone calls day and night from supporters or members of the Front in order to make their life miserable and create a climate of tension and fear. Such a climate was used to stir up a potential confrontation with members of anti-racist groups in front of the court-house in Toronto on January 25, 1993.

Grant Bristow was the coach and the designer of the campaign, which lasted until my public defection to the Canadian Centre on Racism and Prejudice in November of that same year. On several occasions I personally witnessed his role in providing personal information on ``enemies of freedom'', as he used to refer to anti-racists and members of Jewish organizations, to members of the Heritage Front.


He also showed members techniques of intelligence gathering against anti-racists and also how to effectively harass someone. His role was critical in the development of the harassment campaign, and he personally instructed individuals to increase the campaign when he felt results were coming. For instance, harassing calls to an anti-racist woman increased after she had to take sick leave from work. She received calls day and night at home, and even at work. When Grant Bristow found out she was on sick leave, despite his claims in the SIRC report, he instructed people to increase the number of calls since she was, as he put it, on the verge of breaking down.

Grant Bristow provided the information and the knowledge to develop this campaign. Despite the claims made in the SIRC report, this campaign was not a defensive measure or an information-gathering exercise. It was a concerted effort to harass individuals, have them fired from their jobs, and put their personal safety in jeopardy.

As part of this harassment campaign, misleading and inflammatory flyers started to circulate bearing anti-racists' personal addresses and phone numbers. One such flyer, Animal Life Series 1, compared a black man to an ape. I forwarded a copy of this flyer to a couple of anti-racist action members as a warning of what was taking place and because I felt sorry for the victim. The person named on that flyer, whose house had been vandalized, contacted the police. When I refused to disclose the identity of the flyer's makers, I was arrested and charged with its publication.

The producers of the flyer were Wolfgang Droege, Alan Overfield and Grant Bristow. Despite the fact that the Attorney General of Ontario ruled the flyer hate propaganda under section 319 of the Criminal Code, and corroborating statements were made in the SIRC report and in the press, none of these individuals have ever been charged.

Since I could not be a spokesperson any longer, I began to work behind the scenes with Grant Bristow in the intelligence unit of the Heritage Front. I learned greater details about the harassment campaign. I was assigned names and addresses of potential enemies to check up. I investigated individuals and organizations alongside Grant Bristow, who taught me a number of useful investigator's skills.

Over the following months, I was directed by Grant Bristow to obtain information on legitimate organizations in Toronto such as the Irish Freedom Association, North American black nationalist groups and others. Bristow told me he wanted to build a file on these groups.

These groups did not represent any possible threats or menace to the Heritage Front. Was that work part of a greater mandate from CSIS? I have been asking myself this question and cannot find any logical answer to explain such interest on the part of Bristow for these associations.

All information collected would be given to Bristow. If, for instance, intelligence provided personal data on individuals, he would make the decision to ask people to start harassing them. This small section was an instrument for Bristow to focus on targets. Bristow was one of the core leaders of the Heritage Front, along with Gerry Lincoln and Wolfgang Droege.

During the events of June 11, 1993, while members of the Heritage Front went on to confront anti-racists on College Street, at a bar known as Sneaky Dees, Bristow had other plans. He wanted people to go down and attack individuals in their houses and their workplaces to retaliate against what happened at Garry Schipper's house during that night. In some ways, the fact that members followed other Front leaders that night avoided a potential major war on the streets of Toronto, and possible arson.

As time went by, I began having increasing difficulty accepting some of these activities. By July I wanted out. Through a friend, I contacted the Canadian Centre on Racism and Prejudice. I began working with Martin Thériault to collect information on the activities of neo-Nazis.

In September I signed a series of affidavits on criminal activities carried out by members of the Heritage Front. These affidavits were sent to the Attorney General of Ontario in early November 1993. I had a meeting with members of the Ontario Provincial Police about the contents of these statements. Despite these meetings and affidavits, no real investigation or prosecution took place. On November 24, 1993, my defection from the Heritage Front became public.

In March of 1994, I testified in the Federal Court against Wolfgang Droege, Garry Schipper and Ken Barker in a contempt of court proceeding. Despite the sometimes vicious cross-examination, Judge Tremblay-Lamer found my testimony credible, pronounced these individuals guilty and sentenced them to prison terms. My testimony also contributed to the expulsion of Becky Primrose from the ranks of the Reform Party of Canada.


During these proceedings two incidents were somewhat disturbing, to say the least. Grant Bristow was providing audiotapes and elements to feed the lawyers representing the Heritage Front in a failed attempt to discredit me. At the same time, the OPP told the Canadian Human Rights Commission that they would not protect me for the duration of my testimony. The counsel for the Canadian Human Rights Commission had to meet with senior officers of the RCMP in Ottawa to negotiate the terms of security assistance for my entrance to and exit from the courtroom.

In reading the SIRC report, at page 20 of section 5.9.5., the Toronto region investigator of CSIS, or the handler, stated that ``he probably told other agencies that Hategan was not credible''. I am wondering whom, what, and when he told. It seems as if I was not even worth getting protection from a police department for getting neo-Nazis convicted, to be not credible to CSIS, which told other agencies, while the judge accepted my testimony and Bristow was leading the charge to ensure that neo-Nazis would not be sent to jail.

I have read the contents of the SIRC report on the Bristow affair. In respect to the section on the Reform Party of Canada, I have been neither a member nor a supporter of the Reform Party. I have no direct knowledge of Bristow's activities in regard to Reform or Preston Manning.

My direct knowledge of Bristow's activities leads me to conclude that SIRC did not do its work properly. It is astounding to see Bristow praised by SIRC and his handler when you know the nature of the criminal activities in which he took part. The admission of direct knowledge by CSIS of his activities is made on a regular basis during the course of this report.

As a Canadian citizen, I feel that the Bristow affair must be exposed in public. Canadian taxpayers have a right to know. The proceedings of this committee, unlike those of SIRC, are public. This is why I am here today. Your work is critical in this process. There are so many questions to be answered and witnesses to be interviewed.

We learned recently from the testimony of a former agent of CSIS that the regional director in Quebec was part of some dirty tricks carried out by the ancestor of CSIS, the RCMP, in the 1970s. It was also stated that his second-in-command was the handler of Marc Boivin, who was involved in dirty tricks in the labour movement in Quebec in the 1980s. Are we facing a similar situation with the Bristow affair? These are questions for which you need to provide answers. Is the handler coming from the same school?

Finally, I would like to see a full inquiry into the Bristow affair and the role of CSIS. I believe that only through a public inquiry can we get to the bottom of this and ensure that such an operation cannot repeat itself in the future.

Personally, I am not receiving police protection. I am not part of a witness protection program. I was not relocated at taxpayers' money. I did not get a car and a monthly allowance and, believe me, I have to pay for my long-distance calls. However, I offered my services to testify against neo-Nazis and helped send some of them behind bars.

When we evaluate an operation of police or agencies, we look at the end result in order to come to a clear assessment of the work being done. In the case of Bristow, not only should he be charged for some of his criminal activities, but he did not reduce the effectiveness of the Heritage Front. He increased its capacity. I was there and I saw what he did. He never testified against any of these individuals, and his work led to no arrests of neo-Nazis. I repeat - zero arrests.

These facts are sufficient to grant a public inquiry. Thank you very much.

The Chair: We're ready to start questioning.

Mr. Langlois: Mr. Chair, on this first round I will ask you to recognize Mr. Wappel.

The Chair: That's fine.

Mr. Wappel (Scarborough West): Ms Hategan, would you tell us your date of birth, please.

Ms Hategan: December 17, 1974.

Mr. Wappel: Thank you. You told us in your statement that you joined the Heritage Front in the fall of 1991. Can you tell us whom you initially contacted at the Heritage Front?

Ms Hategan: Yes. I contacted the Heritage Front. I listened to the messages for about a week, and then I left a message. Wolfgang Droege was the first person who contacted me. We met and it went from there.


Mr. Wappel: How does one join the Heritage Front, or how did you join it?

Ms Hategan: The way I joined was to call up the hot line from getting that information from the American -

Mr. Wappel: No, what I mean is, do you have to sign a card? Do you have to pay a membership fee? Do you carry anything with you?

Ms Hategan: Not necessarily. Supporters are considered members. If you want to be a card-carrying member, you can do that. You can actually sign and receive a membership card, but it's not necessary.

Mr. Wappel: Did you do that?

Ms Hategan: I couldn't afford it at the time, but I was considered a member. Much later I did receive a membership card, but I didn't have to pay or sign anything at first.

Mr. Wappel: Can you tell me who deemed you to be a member, in your eyes? Was it Droege?

Ms Hategan: Wolfgang and Gerry Lincoln, yes - two of the three.

Mr. Wappel: When you became a member, what were your duties?

Ms Hategan: Anything that needed to be done. I recorded messages on the telephone line. I wrote articles for their magazine Up Front. I spoke at some rallies.

Mr. Wappel: Let's take each of those in turn. Who asked you to record messages on the telephone line?

Ms Hategan: Wolfgang Droege and Gerry Lincoln.

Mr. Wappel: Who asked you to write articles?

Ms Hategan: Gerry Lincoln.

Mr. Wappel: What else did you do?

Ms Hategan: I spoke at rallies. Those same two people, especially Wolfgang, urged me because they felt they needed a woman to be a spokesperson and be on the forefront. Everybody else, you know, was just male.

Mr. Wappel: Okay, what else did you do?

Ms Hategan: After a certain point I distributed flyers.

Mr. Wappel: At whose request?

Ms Hategan: I was given flyers by Wolfgang, just standard Heritage Front promoting flyers.

Mr. Wappel: What else did you do?

Ms Hategan: I tried to recruit. I called back people who had left messages on the hot line. I called them back and asked about what they felt, why they wanted to join, that sort of thing.

Mr. Wappel: Who asked you to do this?

Ms Hategan: Let's see, when I first started doing it, I hadn't been very involved so I didn't know that many people. It was basically Wolfgang and Gerry who I really knew. They're the ones who encouraged me.

Mr. Wappel: Of course, you've mentioned in your statement Grant Bristow. Can you recall when you first met Bristow?

Ms Hategan: It was in 1991, about a month or so after I had joined. He had been away, or he wasn't very active at that point in time, and then he made a comeback and I was introduced. He was introduced to me as the other leader of the Heritage Front, one of the founders.

Mr. Wappel: Who introduced him to you?

Ms Hategan: Wolfgang.

Mr. Wappel: He introduced him to you in those terms - this is one of the leaders of the Front?

Ms Hategan: He had told me a lot about the conception of the Heritage Front and its founders, and when I met Grant I already knew. He said, this is the man we were talking about, the other leader.

Mr. Wappel: Did you ever work with Bristow?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Wappel: What did you do for him, or with him?

Ms Hategan: At first he would give me certain information. He would give me addresses. He taught me how to use the reverse directories and water bills and voters' registries to check out those addresses and get the names of the people living there and the phone numbers. Sometimes those would be distributed to the rest.

Mr. Wappel: The rest of who?

Ms Hategan: The Front, or supporters, or members, depending on who he wanted to harass or who was going to be ``it'' at the moment.

Let's see, the other was work he was just...he told me to go to -

Mr. Wappel: Excuse me, did he think these things up or did he get instructions from Droege or Lincoln? How did it come about?

Ms Hategan: No, that was pretty much his main domain. He knew more about the left wing than anybody else, including Wolfgang. Wolfgang was filled in.

After I was charged in 1993, I couldn't be a spokesperson any more. It was part of my bail conditions not to associate with them. So the only thing I could do at that point was work behind the scenes, which became....

He had asked me, he had instructed me, to harass a particular woman before I got charged, and it was through her.... He wanted me to sort of talk to her and try to get information, and that continued. Then I met somebody from whom I could access information about the left wing, and I passed it on to him. The more we talked and the more he depended on me to check these things out, the closer we got with discussing what was going on.

Mr. Wappel: Mentally I'm still back in the fall of 1991 with you, where you first met Bristow and were introduced to him by Wolfgang Droege. In that period, what was your observation on how the Front was organized and who led it?


Ms Hategan: Wolfgang was mainly the spokesperson. Gerry Lincoln was in charge of anything that came out in writing, such as flyers and magazines. Grant was a figure I hadn't met. They told me he did some intelligence work. He was in charge of that sort of thing. I don't know. That's pretty much it.

Mr. Wappel: After you met him and after you'd started working with him, as you indicated, did your perception change or remain the same in terms of his involvement?

Ms Hategan: I didn't know him very well. From 1991 to 1993 I had met him at people's houses and in bars when the HF was getting together. He had also come to a birthday outing I had attended and he had signed a card and paid for a present. But I didn't really know him very well. I just knew he was a leader.

I really started talking to him.... He approached me in December 1992 to harass a particular somebody. Before, he was just talking vaguely about the left, what they were doing, the fact that there were opponents and things like that. That's when he first approached me and gave me information. From that point on I had more contact with him.

Mr. Wappel: Prior to December 1992 did you have occasion to see him give any speeches?

Ms Hategan: Yes, he spoke at almost every rally, but it was edited from the tapes. Pretty much his -

Mr. Wappel: What do you mean it was edited from the tapes?

Ms Hategan: Gerry Lincoln was also in charge of editing the videotapes. Grant didn't want his to be distributed. They used to sell the tapes for $20. Grant didn't want to be on tape, so Gerry would edit them. His job was mainly fund-raising and getting people stirred up.

Mr. Wappel: In December 1992 he approaches you and he suggests harassing a particular person. Is that right?

Ms Hategan: He doesn't suggest. He wrote down the woman's phone number at home and at work. That night....

I have some statements that I was going to make and give....

Mr. Wappel: What statements are those? Is it the affidavits you're talking about?

Ms Hategan: Yes, where I described the first incident. He had made a flyer in which he named certain anti-racist members as members of the Heritage Front.

An hon. member: Of the ARA?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Wappel: How many affidavits did you make, Ms Hategan?

Ms Hategan: I haven't counted them all. They weren't written all at the same time. I'd say upward of 50 or so.

Mr. Wappel: Do you have copies of them?

Ms Hategan: Not all of them, but I have copies that pertain to Grant right here.

Mr. Wappel: Will you provide them to the committee?

Ms Hategan: Yes, sure.

Mr. Wappel: In one of them, on September 23, 1993, you talk about a woman named Ruth. Is this the woman we're talking about?

Ms Hategan: Yes, she was the first person he told me about.

Mr. Wappel: What did he want you to do with Ruth?

Ms Hategan: At first, in December 1992, it was pretty much that she was ``it''. That's the night he really told everybody. There was a huge get-together, at least thirty people. He had told everybody about this ``it'' campaign, where somebody would be named ``it'' and they would be called day and night, constantly, that sort of thing. He told us there was another man who had been ``it'', but now Ruth McKenzie was ``it''. He wrote down the number and gave it to me. He urged me to call her and harass her. He also wanted me to record a message on personal lines, pretending I was Ruth, and leave obscene messages.

Mr. Wappel: This meeting where the ``it'' campaign was discussed - just so I can be clear, you're saying it was Grant Bristow who talked about the ``it'' campaign and outlined it to the Heritage Front members who were at this meeting?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Wappel: Then subsequent to that meeting, he gave you the name of this Ruth person -

Ms Hategan: It was at that meeting, later.

Mr. Wappel: It was at that meeting?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Wappel: And he asked you to make calls to her. What kind of calls? What instructions did he give you?


Ms Hategan: To let her know that we were watching her and that she wasn't alone. The objective was to call her as often as possible and make sure she knew that she had been wrong in going up against the Heritage Front and being a member of anti-racist action.

At that point I asked him if she knew she was ``it'', and he said yes, he'd already called her and made sure she knew. So now it's getting as many people as possible.... He said say, whatever you want, as long as she knows we're there and as long as she's shaken up.

Mr. Wappel: This was December of 1992. Is that right?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Wappel: And you continued this until the fall of 1993? I'm talking about the ``it'' campaign.

Ms Hategan: The ``it'' campaign started around December 1992. Yes, I think it really stopped in November when I left, because that's when I started talking and making it really public. It went down a little bit at the beginning of the fall. It wasn't as intense. The most intense had been from December 1992 up to the fall of the next year.

Mr. Wappel: Throughout that period of time did anyone other than Grant Bristow give you any instructions in connection with the ``it'' campaign?

Ms Hategan: It depends. Do you mean the ``it'' campaign itself or the larger campaign to get the left wing? Grant was the main -

Mr. Wappel: No, I'm talking about the ``it'' campaign where you targeted a particular person who was ``it''.

Ms Hategan: Yes, Grant was the only one who instructed me regarding that.

Mr. Wappel: All right. Was there anyone other than Ruth?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Wappel: How many?

Ms Hategan: I received information from Grant on about two dozen people, either their names or their addresses. There were a lot more people than that who we considered our enemies, but I think that was pretty much what he was concentrating on.

Mr. Wappel: When he told you to call, were you to identify yourself?

Ms Hategan: No. He was careful. I could mention the fact that I was Heritage Front, but I was not to give too many details, because we didn't want them to.... But she had to know that it was because of her work against the Heritage Front that she was being targeted.

Mr. Wappel: Tell us a little bit about the instructions. I don't want to put ideas in your head. What times of the day or night were you to call?

The Chair: Mr. Wappel, if I could just intervene, we usually arrange our time rounds in ten-minute blocks.

Mr. Wappel: You can stop me any time you want, Mr. Chair.

The Chair: I'm wondering, Mr. Harris, if you would mind if Mr. Wappel continued with the line of questioning, because it's all falling into sequence. He would use Mr. Langlois' ten minutes and his own ten minutes and then we would go to you for your ten minutes. Is that all right?

Mr. Harris (Prince George - Bulkley Valley): Sure. Go ahead.

Mr. Wappel: Thank you. You just stop me, Mr. Chair, any time the clock tells you.

So did he give you any instructions with respect to when to phone and where to phone?

Ms Hategan: Yes, to call her at work and at home any time. He said it would be preferable to use a phone booth or use call-block when I called so that she couldn't trace my phone number. At night would be even better, but just any time. That's why he said to get the call-block, because I couldn't go to a pay phone in the middle of the night, so I would use the call-block. There was an exchange number in Toronto; people could call through that and it would be a different phone number that showed up on the call display screen. So he gave me that phone number to use so that she couldn't trace my call.

Mr. Wappel: In your statement you said that Bristow showed members techniques of intelligence gathering against anti-racists and also how to effectively harass someone.

Ms Hategan: Right.

Mr. Wappel: Other than what you've told me, was there anything he showed you or told you to do?

Ms Hategan: He told me about certain psychological texts he had read about how to effectively harass someone - like I said there, like letting them know that they're always watched, making them feel very paranoid so that they will turn on themselves.

I didn't have a car or a driver's licence, but he was showing me how to lose somebody. He had shown other people as well. He also showed me how to follow somebody. He told me how to appear inconspicuous, to walk by a building or observe a building for a few hours. That's aside from the instructions he gave me on...he also taught me how to pretend to be somebody else, such as a cop or a reporter or anything like that, calling and getting information.


Aside from that, that's right: voters' registry, water main listings, reverse directories. He told me how I could get somebody's licence plate number by calling the driver's licence bureau - I'm not sure - and saying.... Well, he told me it was $5 and how to go about doing that and all those sorts of things.

Mr. Wappel: In your statement you say that you're talking about the Animal Life Series flyer. You say that the producers of it were Droege, Overfield, and Bristow. Why do you say that?

Ms Hategan: Because they made it.

Mr. Wappel: How do you know?

Ms Hategan: The flyers I received were from Wolfgang Droege and they were fresh out of the machine. He had just got them. The only machine they ever used to do the flyers was the one at Alan Overfield's, and later on it was confirmed by Marque Poole, who at the time was Wolfgang's girlfriend. She told me that, yes, they had been done over at Overfield's, which confirmed my suspicions.

Granted, the name on the flyer wasn't of a very well-known left wing.... She was a very young women. She had hardly done any work with anti-racist groups. The only person who could have had that information was Grant, and he had information. After I got charged, I wanted to know a little bit about this person, and he told me a bit more. He was really the only person in the Heritage Front who knew anything about this girl.

Mr. Wappel: You say that he was a producer of the flyer. You got the flyers from Droege. They were produced by Alan Overfield's machine, and you say that Bristow was the producer of the flyer. On what do you base that?

Ms Hategan: Because he provided the information that went on the flyer, so he produced half of it. Underneath the cartoon it says, ``Association for the Advancement of Semi-Intelligence - for info call or write'' so-and-so, the left-wing girl - ``Toronto, Ontario''. It had her address and phone number, and her house had been vandalized. The only person who had that information was Grant. Wolfgang didn't have it; Overfield didn't have it. Grant was the only head of intelligence at the time. He's the only one who had this information and he provided it to Wolfgang and to Overfield in order to make this flyer.

Mr. Wappel: I guess that's a conclusion you've drawn that others might not draw. I imagine he provided the information to Droege and Overfield.

Ms Hategan: He provided it to make this cartoon.

Mr. Wappel: Did he at all talk to you about it or boast about it or anything of that nature that would lead you to believe he was part of the production of it?

Ms Hategan: Aside from him giving me the information about the person on this flyer that nobody else had, he was very hesitant. All he said was that those flyers.... He knew about them. He talked about them with me. He had seen them.

Mr. Wappel: Near the end of your statement you say that wen you know the nature of the criminal activities in which Bristow took part.... Could you list for us the nature of the criminal activities in which Bristow took part, in your view?

Ms Hategan: He called people himself. He harassed them. He threatened them. He played recordings of some calls he had made. One was to Ruth. One was to a man I really couldn't identify. He had played them to me and then he was threatening them. Aside from that, he also called them himself. He would get me on a three-way and he would call them. I would be silent. He would be the one who did the talking. While I was on a three-way, he would also call answering machines and access their code and break into them and get the messages. All that is illegal.

He of course posed as various individuals to call and get information or to go and put on demonstrations, take pictures, etc. He instructed people; he urged people to harass and threaten and stalk others. I think that about covers it.


Mr. Wappel: In virtually the final paragraph of your comments, you say he increased the Heritage Front's capacity. I presume you mean he increased its capacity to operate and increased its effectiveness. Would you tell us what he did, in your view, that increased its effectiveness?

Ms Hategan: In December 1992 the only progress the Heritage Front was making was pretty much getting new members. It was very contained and very self-absorbed. Grant is the one who made it expand into targeting the left wing. He's the one who came in with the briefcase of names and addresses.

He increased its capacity by teaching a lot of people who didn't know anything. I didn't know anything about getting information to get somebody; I didn't know any of that. He taught them all the skills he had as a licensed private investigator. He increased his intelligence capacity. He taught us how to get intelligence, how to be effective, how to intimidate these people into not coming after us any more, how to do all those sort of things. It kind of grew.

A lot of people were unsure about the Heritage Front, but the excitement of being involved in this big spy operation, with intelligence and everything, made them even more active. It was exciting to go after people, threaten them and phone them with death threats and that sort of thing. He involved them in that, and in that sense it made it even bigger.

The Church of the Creator, which was another part of the Heritage Front, was a very different group. But a lot of members were from both groups and they started really concentrating on intelligence. They were already paramilitary-minded, but they concentrated on the intelligence aspect after meeting and talking with Grant.

Mr. Harris: Ms Hategan, thank you for coming today. During the two years you were part of the Heritage Front, from the fall of 1991 to 1993, were you working?

Ms Hategan: I lived at home.

Mr. Harris: I see. You must have had a need for income. Did you get income from any of the members, Mr. Bristow or Mr. Droege?

Ms Hategan: No. There was a brief period of time when I did go on assistance. Wolfgang Droege and a bunch of other members were encouraging everybody to go on assistance so they would have extra income for the Heritage Front, so I provided them with some of the money I received. But I was only on assistance for about three months because I was really afraid of doing that. I wasn't comfortable doing that. That was before I was charged, so it was about December 1992.

Mr. Harris: Were many members that you know of encouraged to go on assistance and then turn over the funds they got to the Heritage Front?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Harris: Was there ever talk about a scheme where everyone sat around and said, now this is how we can get some money?

Ms Hategan: They always sat around discussing ideas, whether it was starting up a coffee shop and getting money that way, or having prostitutes work for the Heritage Front to get money and that sort of thing. Drug dealing was mentioned - anything like that - and welfare was one of the things mentioned. They said there was no way they could find out. You could get about $600, which was the maximum in Toronto, and surely at least $200 could go toward the group.

Mr. Harris: So there was some government funding of this organization in a roundabout way.

Ms Hategan: I suppose.

Mr. Harris: The SIRC report states that members of the Heritage Front had various plans to either infiltrate the Reform Party, which was Al Overfield's plan, or try to discredit it, which was Droege's plan. Were you in on any of the discussions or aware of them?

Ms Hategan: I was around when the discussions took place. It was pretty much short of putting a message on the hot line. Everybody at meetings everywhere was encouraged to join the Reform. If you didn't have the $10, they would provide you with the $10. It was just to get your name. They especially wanted members who weren't very high profile in the Heritage Front so they could go back and forth. Almost anybody who joined the Heritage Front was told that he or she could always join the Reform Party too.


Mr. Harris: With Droege, Bristow and Overfield, when you got together and talked about getting involved with the Reform Party in some way -

Ms Hategan: I don't think that Wolfgang's idea was like you said, that his plan was to discredit them.

Mr. Harris: He wanted to discredit it, okay.

Ms Hategan: No, I don't think so. The way they put it was that they would have as many people infiltrate the party as possible so that in the next few years, as the membership grew and grew, they could somehow do a sort of takeover. The people who were already members...there would be the university students, the more highly educated of the Heritage Front bunch, who would join the Reform Party. Maybe in a few years, slowly, we'd get our members to rise up in the party and eventually, hopefully lead.

Mr. Harris: I want to get an idea of what role Grant Bristow played.

Ms Hategan: I don't know about his relationship with that. It was very vague, everybody being encouraged to join and everything. Grant went along with it. He said, sure, join. That's all I know about it.

Mr. Harris: Did he seem to take any leading role in the encouragement or putting together of a plan of any sort?

Ms Hategan: I don't know.

Mr. Harris: You said if a member didn't have the $10 to join the Reform Party, that would come. Where would that come from? Did you ever see Grant Bristow giving anybody money?

Ms Hategan: No. That would come from the leadership. What I assumed is that any of the core leaders - Wolfgang, Gerry, Grant - would put some money together. If you really wanted to join the Reform Party, the $10 wasn't going to stand in your way.

Mr. Harris: When you were involved, when you were sitting around talking about joining the Reform Party, you might have got around to talking about political parties in general. Was there any indication that some of the Heritage Front members might be members of the Progressive Conservative Party, for example?

Ms Hategan: Yes, there was somebody who was the youth leader of the PC Party.

Mr. Harris: I see. Are you permitted to tell us who that would be?

Ms Hategan: There was a person by the name of David Earle. He had come to meetings. He wanted to broaden it beyond just being in the Heritage Front. He wanted to join more national socialist organizations. He had gone up to the convention where they voted Kim Campbell in and everything. He was the youth leader of the PCs.

Mr. Harris: So a pretty visible link was established between him and the Progressive Conservative Party. Were there any other people in the conversation who indicated they...?

Ms Hategan: I don't know enough about what was going on.

Mr. Harris: I was thinking about when you were sitting around at some of the gatherings, talking about getting involved in the Reform Party. Someone brings up the idea, well, this is how we do it.

This David Earle, was he the only one, or were there any others who maybe appeared to have an association with the Progressive Conservative Party?

Ms Hategan: I'm not sure. Marque Poole had also dated David Earle, and I think she signed up with the PC Party too. I don't know much about that.

Mr. Harris: Did you ever hear Grant Bristow mention anything about a meeting with any cabinet ministers of the Conservative Party, such as Otto Jelinek?

Ms Hategan: I don't know.

Mr. Harris: David Earle and that other person you mentioned, Marque Poole, were they involved with the leadership campaign for Kim Campbell?

Ms Hategan: David Earle was.

Mr. Harris: Was he working on her campaign, do you know?

Ms Hategan: I think he was with Jean Charest's campaign. Yes, because I remember he really ``dissed'' Kim Campbell at the time.

Mr. Harris: Did they ever discuss anything about what was going on in this leadership campaign when you were getting together?

Ms Hategan: I really wasn't interested in Conservative politics at the time, so I didn't really pay much attention, even if they did discuss it. We didn't really discuss it.

Mr. Harris: When did you first become aware that Grant Bristow might in fact be working with the CSIS organization?


Ms Hategan: It was August 13, actually the night before the story first broke in the Toronto Sun. I spoke with Bill Dunphy and he told me there was something really bad about Grant that I should know. I asked what it was, did he kill somebody? He said no, it was worse - he's a CSIS agent. It was shocking, but it also made me realize why the police had been so reluctant in helping me out.

Most of the first bunch of documents I had given the OPP when we met were about Grant's criminal, illegal activities. I couldn't understand. There was stuff in there about weapons too, which they could very well have prosecuted somebody for. I couldn't understand why they said, sorry, there's just not enough evidence in here to do anything. Obviously, I testified. I got people convicted. I had evidence. I had evidence about weapons. I had evidence about Grant. So I couldn't understand that.

I wasn't given any protection. I was left out in the cold. I had to move around the place, with just friends helping me out. I didn't have any of that, and that's the night when everything became clear.

Mr. Harris: So when you put yourself in jeopardy by leaving the Heritage Front and starting to testify against them, you were a little bit confused about why you weren't getting some protection.

Ms Hategan: That's right. I was very confused. Grant was still there. Grant was feeding the defence. I had no clue.

I started investigating myself. I and Ken Barker in the Heritage Front had started checking up on things. I used the skills that Grant had taught me to go back into the old reverse directories and find out what I could about him - not because I thought he was with the government or anything, but just because I couldn't figure out...he had told various people different stories. I was working so closely with him in intelligence and he was well aware of my breaking my bail conditions. I wanted to know what was going on and why he did that, but I never had a clue until August.

Mr. Harris: Within the Heritage Front, did Mr. Bristow seem to give orders or did he seem to take them?

Ms Hategan: He never took orders. Giving orders...on some occasions he did, like on June 11. That night he did appear to be giving orders. Usually he was more behind the scenes, observing, directing people into doing whatever.

On June 11, though, there was an anti-racist march and it wasn't where we expected it to be. I moved on. They went and demonstrated in front of a....

Mr. Harris: I see that there.

Ms Hategan: Afterwards the HF got together in Allan Gardens in Toronto and they were very angry about what had happened. They wanted to do something. It was Grant on one end, and then there was George Burdi, who is also a Church of the Creator member, on the other. He got up on a table with a megaphone and said, let's go to Sneaky Dees and get those lefties. Grant, on the other hand, suggested a number of home addresses of people - I knew who those people were - and also a workplace to go and smear excrement on and break the windows, fire-bomb the place.

What happened was there were more followers who were led by George Burdi, because he was young. He was a skinhead. He was totally paramilitary. So they decided to go with him, and they went to Sneaky Dees, which is why I said it was very close. If they had followed Grant, some people's homes would have been destroyed. That's the first time I really....

Mr. Harris: Do you think the Heritage Front was well organized? Would it have been as well organized without Grant Bristow's involvement?

Ms Hategan: No. It was organized enough to recruit. They knew to operate the telephone lines. They weren't that dumb. They knew to put out the newspaper. They did all those things inwards. Most of the people didn't know what to do if they were ever stopped by a police officer. They didn't know any of those things. They didn't know what CSIS meant. They didn't know any of these things, or what the RCMP's or the OPP's mandates are. They didn't know any of that.

Grant stepped in. He taught us the skills and how to take care of ourselves and how to make sure that our group was secure. It really helped build, more than anything else, the youth wing.

There were other people who got really involved after feeling the rush of being part of the intelligence. They were encouraged to get guns and to stock up on ammo. Grant wasn't it, but....

The Chair: I just have to note that we certainly had a very fulsome ten minutes here.

Mr. Harris: Oh, did we? I'm sorry.


The Chair: In theory, we've completed the first three ten-minute rounds. I would suggest we move to five-minute rounds, alternating.

Mr. Langlois.


Mr. Langlois: Ms Hategan, you mentioned earlier charges and parole. At what time were you charged and under what charges?


Ms Hategan: In February of 1993, I was charged with publishing defamatory libel over this flyer. It was because the police had tracked it down to me when I gave it to the two left-wing ARA members. So that's how it was linked to me and I was charged over it.

Later on, after permission was granted from the Attorney General in July of 1993, they added a new charge over the old one, and that was hate propaganda. By that time I was already on my way out, so it didn't influence me.

Ultimately the charges were dropped, because I have an affidavit from one of the people I gave the flyer to that says I intended to warn that person about this flyer, about her name and phone number and address being passed around.


Mr. Langlois: You tell me that the charges were dropped. Earlier you talked about parole. Were you found guilty or did you plead guilty to any charge?


Ms Hategan: No, I was never prosecuted. What happened is that the head of the hate crimes unit in Toronto was more on our side, was more interested in prosecuting anti-racists. He had seen me violating these conditions. I even went to court with the Heritage Front members when I wasn't supposed to. He always approached me and said, ``You're pushing it, be careful,'' but he never did anything.

So I was never prosecuted. That's pretty much it.

The Chair: Mr. Copeland might like to clarify some of those terms in terms of prosecution and charging and things like that.

Mr. Paul Copeland (Lawyer): If I could indicate, I acted for Ms Hategan on the charges. I started acting for her in November of 1993 when it became public that she'd left the Heritage Front. Eventually the prosecution was scheduled to take place in I believe June of 1994.

I provided to the crown attorney, Mr. Bains, an affidavit of one of the crown witnesses indicating the information she had gotten from Ms Hategan at the time the leaflet was handed over. It was very apparent at that point that she was handing it over as a warning to the members of the ARA as to what was coming rather than for the purposes of promoting racial hatred, which was the charge against her.

We had intended to argue the constitutionality of the defamatory libel provisions, but the Crown wasn't really interested in having that argument go forward. The charges were withdrawn by the Crown in court. The prosecution never went ahead, finally, although she was before the courts, had a preliminary hearing and the matter was scheduled for trial on at least one occasion in the general division court.

If you wish, I can leave with you a copy of Edan Thomas's affidavit.

The Chair: Thank you.


Mr. Langlois: So your client doesn't have a criminal record according to the definition in the Canadian Criminal Records Act?


Mr. Copeland: Criminal record? No, she does not.


Mr. Langlois: Ms Hategan, did you live on welfare when you got to know Mr. Bristow?

Ms Hategan: No.

Mr. Langlois: What did you live on?


Ms Hategan: I lived with my mother at home.


Mr. Langlois: So, was your mother indirectly funding the Heritage Front?


Ms Hategan: No, she wasn't funding the Heritage Front. At one point in time I had moved out for a little bit, and then I came back home. That's when the welfare thing was brought in.

But no, she wasn't funding. I never received money from her to give to the Heritage Front.

I had gone to the States to do an interview on an American TV talk show. I used the money given to me then to give as well.



Mr. Langlois: When you came in contact with Mr. Bristow, your financial resources were limited. Do you agree with this statement?


Ms Hategan: Yes.


Mr. Langlois: According to you, did Mr. Bristow seem to be in a better financial situation? Did it look like he had enough money or quite a good amount of money?


Ms Hategan: I'm not sure. He had his own car. He paid his bills. He sometimes picked up other people's bills. He pitched in for the present I was given. He seemed financially secure.


Mr. Langlois: When Mr. Bristow paid his bills or invited people, did he pay cash, with a credit card or by cheque?


Ms Hategan: It depends. He used all at certain times. Most of the time, though, it was a credit card.


Mr. Langlois: Could you see if the credit cards were in his name?


Ms Hategan: There was one time, which was after he found out that I had asked questions. It was later in 1993. He found out that I had been questioning why he was telling people different things. We were at a restaurant with the Heritage Front lawyers. Just to prove to me that Grant Bristow was his name and everything, he showed me his American Express card, which had Grant Bristow on it.

Ms Cohen (Windsor - St. Clair): Just before I begin, I want to ask some questions about why you didn't cooperate with SIRC and that sort of thing.

Just to reassure you, if I ask a question, Mr. Copeland, that seems to be moving toward solicitor-client privilege, and you get jumpy about that, just stop me. I don't have any intention of trying to violate or offend that in any way.

Ms Hategan, after you left the Heritage Front or at that time, you had quite a bit of publicity concerning your activities. It seems to me there were times when you were prepared to come forward with information and times when you weren't. So I'm just trying to sort out what barriers might have been in your mind in terms of you cooperating with SIRC.

I understand you spoke before the mayor's committee on racism. Is that right?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Ms Cohen: And did you do that with or without counsel?

Ms Hategan: He wasn't there. I did it on my own.

Ms Cohen: Did you have a lawyer at that time?

Ms Hategan: Officially, whenever I have a question to ask, he helps me out. He's here representing me.

Mr. Copeland: If I might answer the question, the answer is yes.

Ms Cohen: When you appeared before the mayor's committee on racism, you didn't have any discomfort with doing that?

Ms Hategan: I was more comfortable, because once the charges against me were withdrawn, I could talk about incidents that had happened when I had been breaching my conditions and couldn't talk. So that's why it was more comfortable.

Ms Cohen: And you also appeared before the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Is that correct?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Ms Cohen: Did you have counsel at that time?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Ms Cohen: Did the Canadian Human Rights Commission pay for that or make that available to you?

Mr. Copeland: If I could indicate, she testified in the Federal Court before Madam Justice Tremblay-Lamer. This was the human rights application for contempt citation.

I appeared on a couple of occasions with her and accompanied her to -

Ms Cohen: I don't want to know your fee basis. I've been there.

Mr. Copeland: I can indicate that it was during the time I was representing her on the criminal charges.

Ms Cohen: You've come before us today, and we've made that available for you. We brought you here at the expense of this committee in order to hear your testimony. Is that correct?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Ms Cohen: There's a record being made, that's all.

As for the Security Intelligence Review Committee, there were direct and indirect contacts made with you, yet you refused to cooperate with them.

Ms Hategan: There were no direct ones. Everything was done through Paul.

Ms Cohen: Did a researcher from SIRC ever talk to you directly?

Ms Hategan: No.


I have a couple of things. You mentioned that I appeared to want to provide information, sometimes not. I met with the OPP, and I was ready to finally provide information early November 1993. That's when I felt rebuffed.

Up to that point in time, I had been preparing myself. I thought I was going to obviously be accepted into the witness protection and relocation program. I wasn't going to worry about anything else. All I would worry about would be testifying.

Obviously, it didn't turn out that way. I was on my own. The only way I could of think of making my story public was by doing interviews and things like that. I hadn't been intending to do that, but I was forced to do that. It's just a way of making sure that the story was known, and also making sure people knew about the harassment campaign. Because nothing about that had been let out before. I felt I owed it to some of the people who had been harassed to let it be known.

About SIRC, well, first, they weren't prepared to provide legal counsel fees. Second, I didn't know what was going to happen. I didn't know if the only credible person in this book was going to be Grant Bristow, which I think it is.

It wasn't going to be a public hearing. I didn't know what was going to happen. I felt uncomfortable talking to somebody without my lawyer present, without a closed-door meeting, and without knowing what the outcome was going to be. That is why I was kind of uncomfortable about meeting with them.

Ms Cohen: All right, but you would agree with me - I'm not trying to be argumentative - that by doing that, you guaranteed that they would hear Bristow's side, not your side, basically.

Ms Hategan: I was more concerned about anything that I said being twisted around and me not being able to defend myself publicly.

I've read it. I don't see one credible person. Wolfgang Droege's word is taken for granted in saying that I'm not credible or something.

Ms Cohen: I'm very concerned about what barriers there might be not just for you, but for other people, in terms of cooperating with the Security Intelligence Review Committee, which, like it or not, is the agency we have to oversee CSIS at this time.

What would have made it possible for you, in your mind, to deal with them directly?

Ms Hategan: It would have taken having my lawyer present and making it public enough so that things wouldn't get twisted around or covered up.

Mr. Copeland: If I could answer part of that, I have a series of correspondence between myself and the Security Intelligence Review Committee. My view of the correspondence is that we made it very clear to them that if they were not going to assist Ms Hategan in having me attend the hearings as her counsel, then she wasn't going to cooperate with them. I'm happy to file that material with you.

Ms Cohen: Thank you.

So had there been a mechanism for SIRC to pay your expenses, including counsel fee, would that have done it? Say you could have had Mr. Copeland or counsel representing you.

Ms Hategan: Yes. I would have met with them.

Ms Cohen: I'll ask you this. Again, I don't want to impose on your privacy here. Did you apply to legal aid for counsel? Did you ask the Ontario Legal Aid Plan, for instance, to fund this?

Mr. Copeland: If I could answer that question, I'm vice-chair of the Law Society's legal aid committee. I doubt very much whether there would have been funding available for that under the legal aid plan.

Ms Cohen: I'll comment on that. I practised legal aid law for a long time, and I've had certificates to represent people who were appearing in circumstances like that.

But we can argue that at another time. I just want to know if the application was made.

Mr. Copeland: No.

Ms Cohen: Of course, in Windsor, we have reasonable officials running our legal aid plan.

Mr. Copeland, maybe there's a problem in Toronto.

Mr. Copeland: I'm trying to remember. I don't think Ms Hategan was in Ontario at that point, which was one of the other problems.

The Chair: It appears, though, that in so many ways, including in the Ontario legal aid plan, that times have changed.

Mr. Harris: Ms Hategan, did you ever see Grant Bristow with someone who just was an absolute stranger you'd never seen before? In your group you all see each other on a regular basis. Was there ever a time when Grant showed up or you met him when there was someone present whom you'd never seen before?

Ms Hategan: Aside from meetings, which is when people were getting together, or we had new people coming in or rallies, no. If it was a big get-together, I wouldn't know some of those people and whether he had talked with them. But aside from that, when I met him one on one, it was just us.

Mr. Harris: Okay. I'm thinking more like when you met him in a restaurant, and there was someone there whom you'd never seen.

Ms Hategan: No.

Mr. Harris: How many of the Heritage Front members with whom you became associated appeared to have jobs? Were there many or were there very few?


Ms Hategan: I'd say the majority didn't. Some did, but the majority didn't.

Mr. Harris: Did any other of the Heritage Front members you knew have credit cards?

Ms Hategan: I don't know. I think some did. I didn't see. Wolfgang had some.

Mr. Harris: Did you see them using them?

Ms Hategan: Yes, Wolfgang had a credit card. I think Ken Barker had a credit card. I'm not really sure about the others.

Mr. Harris: Okay.

Did you ever attend a Reform Party rally with Overfield and Bristow and the others when they were providing security?

Ms Hategan: No.

Mr. Harris: Did you know they were providing security for Preston Manning?

Ms Hategan: Yes, I heard something about that, but I didn't know anything else. It was a little before my time, before the time I came in. I wasn't really interested in that. I had heard they had done it, but it wasn't a big issue.

Mr. Harris: In the winter of 1991 and early winter of 1992, you would have just been in. They provided security for a rally in Pickering. I'm just wondering if you -

Ms Hategan: For a rally of the Reform Party? No, I don't know anything.

Mr. Harris: With your knowledge of the members of the Heritage Front, would you say Grant Bristow is at risk right now?

Ms Hategan: He's at risk and I'm at risk. The only difference is in what we get for what we did. Both of us are at risk. Yes, I would say somebody who has done that sort thing is obviously at risk.

Mr. Harris: Would you think he's any more at risk than you are, or might you be more at risk than he is?

Ms Hategan: Right now he's a bit more at risk than me. My problem is that I actually got people convicted, so it kind of balances it out.

Mr. Harris: Right.

Have you ever been threatened by the Heritage party with physical harm, with death?

Ms Hategan: Yes. Death was made as a third party. I was threatened physically, and threats were made my way. Death was put as in, ``You know what happens to rats; rats end up in the sewers'', and that sort of thing. So it's more in a third party.

But yes, I was. I was even threatened by Grant when I was in there.

Mr. Harris: Can I get the name of that person who was David Earle's associate? Was it Marque Poole?

Ms Hategan: Yes, Marque Poole-Jewer.

Mr. Harris: Just to go over this again, as far as you know, they were the only two who ever made it known that they were involved in another political party.

Ms Hategan: To be honest, I really can't answer that. I don't know. There was talk about infiltrating political parties. Reform was the most encouraged one because it was the closest to what we believed in.

Mr. Harris: You mentioned earlier that David Earle was working on Jean Charest's campaign.

Ms Hategan: Yes. He was one of the delegates there.

Mr. Harris: Was he actively involved in campaigning for Jean Charest?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Harris: Did you ever attend any meetings with him, any Conservative meetings?

Ms Hategan: No.

Mr. Harris: I think that's all, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair: Thank you.

Mr. Wappel for five minutes.

Mr. Wappel: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms Hategan, who's Ken Barker?

Ms Hategan: Ken Barker is a member of the Heritage Front. He also had some hotlines. He had the Equal Rights for Whites hotline. He became a top member and he obviously also did other work for the Front.

Mr. Wappel: Did you have any reason to suspect him as being a police informant?

Ms Hategan: No. At the beginning, the summer of 1992, he had just come on the scene. People - Wolfgang in particular, and Gerry - were kind of concerned about police informants in general. The Heritage Front is the kind of organization that would be concerned about police informants. So this guy comes along, he's very eager to help out, he'll do anything. They're wondering what's going on, why is he so eager?

What made them finally accept him was the fact that he had two young daughters. Then they said, well, if he were a police agent, they wouldn't really have kids undercover, so he's genuine. Because of that they approached him to start the new hotline in case the other hotline was shut down. That brought him even closer. He started doing just about everything, including firing.


As well, Ken Barker was arrested in connection with the armed robbery of a doughnut shop. He had guns and that sort of thing.

Mr. Wappel: You told us Marque Poole was Wolfgang Droege's girlfriend at one time.

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Wappel: Was there any reason to suspect she was a police informant?

Ms Hategan: Sometimes they thought so because she got together with a lot of guys in the Heritage Front, and they wondered why she was doing that. They thought maybe she was a police informant trying to get information from them. I didn't think so. She seemed too disoriented about a lot of things to be a real police informant.

Mr. Wappel: Okay.

Do you have any personal knowledge about any activities Bristow may have conducted between extremist groups in Canada and international groups? For example, do you have any knowledge of Bristow getting in touch with extremist groups in the United States?

Ms Hategan: He was big in organizing the security for David Mahon and the Metzgers. Dennis Mahon was the leader of the White Berets of the Ku Klux Klan. He had come in and organized the coming in and the security. He also organized the coming in of the Metzgers.

They had to be -

Mr. Wappel: Let's not go too fast. You say he organized the coming in of the Metzgers and Mahon. First of all, how do you know this?

Ms Hategan: It was talk. The people who had gone over.... I don't know exactly what his role was in the Metzgers being brought in, but he was involved in that. He talked about it.

Mr. Wappel: Did he talk about it with you?

Ms Hategan: Yes, with me, and with the other people. Drew Maynard, Wolfgang, and Gerry Lincoln: they were some of the people who organized smuggling them in over the border and getting the money together for everything. He was part of that.

I know what the other three did. I'm not sure exactly what Grant did, but I know he was involved in that.

Mr. Wappel: Just a minute. Were you present when discussions took place in connection with bringing these people over, and was the term ``smuggling'' used?

Ms Hategan: Yes. The term ``smuggling''.... I wasn't there at the discussion, where they discussed actually everything, but I was there for previous discussions, and I was there afterwards, where they were saying, ``Okay, we have to get these people in; how are we going to do it?'' They didn't know how.

They sent about two or three cars over the border. Tom Metzgers has a record and can't come into Canada, so the easiest way for him to come in is for him to be smuggled over the border.

They dressed him and his son like rabbis, and they smuggled them over in one car. They thought, well, ZOG isn't government, so obviously they're going to let in people who are members of the Zionist Occupational Government. They thought they would be best disguised as rabbis, and that's how they were smuggled in.

Mr. Wappel: Do you know who came up with this plan?

Ms Hategan: I'm not sure who came up with the idea.

Mr. Wappel: Do you know who brought them in?

Ms Hategan: I know Drew Maynard was involved. Wolfgang was somewhat involved. He couldn't go over because he couldn't go into the States. Ken Barker was involved in that as well.

Mr. Wappel: What about Bristow?

Ms Hategan: I don't know.

Mr. Wappel: Now, what about technology, computers and that sort of thing? Did you have any personal experience with Bristow and modern technology, such as computers, gadgets for phones and that sort of thing?

Ms Hategan: Yes, gadgets for phones, and.... Well, aside from the fact that he was very well.... Once I was speaking to him on the phone while he was typing at the computer. He had various files on individuals and organizations. He had approached me to write to this black nationalist organization in the States to get some information, because he wanted to build a file on them. There were also some black fundamentalist groups in Toronto, in Canada, that he wanted to build up a file on. He wanted me to kind of....

I wrote the letters under a different name, sent them and gave a P.O. box number I got from Grant.

He also knew that I was a supporter of the Irish nationalist movement and that I had gone to a meeting of this organization called the Irish Freedom Association. He was very curious about that, so I provided him with written documentation of names, addresses and things I had researched. He wanted me to continue that as well. It was just intelligence-gathering.

About the gadgets over the phone, yes, he would tape-record.... I was supposed to be setting Ruth Mackenzie up for something. I would talk to her to try to get her to be friends with me. He was recording this.


One time I did that, and he had some sort was different. It wasn't a tape recorder. It was something you attach to the phone to record, and he had that. So the other thing...yes, high-gadget stuff. He had a car police transmission scanner in his car. He always turned it on.

It said in the SIRC report that he didn't turn it on to the right frequency. Yes, he did. He turned it on because I was in the car once, and it was clearly cops talking to other cops over the scanner.

Also, on June 11, that's how he was able to follow the progress of the anti-racist faction's demonstration. He had a Walkman-type scanner as well. He listened to the police talking about where they were going: they were going on the street car; they were leaving Schipper's house. He's the one who directed everybody. He said, okay, that's where they're going. Everybody jumped into cars and followed them to the demonstration.

Mr. Wappel: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Wappel.

Before I go to Mr. Langlois, for the benefit of the transcript, just in case these words are not in Oxford, you used the term ``ZOG ''. That's ZOG, standing for...?

Ms Hategan: Zionist Occupational Government.

The Chair: Thank you, and about a half hour ago you used the word ``dissed'' -

Ms Hategan: Put down.

The Chair: - which we'll let the translators find in the dictionary. Thank you.

Ms Hategan: You won't find the words he used in the dictionary.

The Chair: Mr. Langlois for five minutes.


Mr. Langlois: Ms Hategan, in answer to one of Mr. Wappel's questions, you said that Mr. Bristow had a propensity for giving orders. Did I understand you correctly?


Ms Hategan: Yes, especially when intelligence was concerned. Everybody looked at him as the all-knowing figure when it came to the enemies, the opponents, the left wing. So if he said this person is the leader, then everybody went after that person. His word was pretty much law when it came to the intelligence.

In other areas, I'm not so sure. People were more likely to follow members who were prominent leaders rather than somebody who was doing intelligence. But Grant had the ultimate say when it came to the intelligence.


Mr. Langlois: Would you say that he had a military way of giving orders?


Ms Hategan: He was very good at manipulating a conversation. He was very amicable. He was friendly, made jokes of it.

Sometimes he said, okay, Elisse, here are the people; I want you to do this; I want you to go and follow them. That was much later.

But at first he's very friendly. He makes people feel as if they're taking part in this big activity; they're defending their race by doing this sort of thing. He did order, but he didn't put it in a military way. He made it friendlier, as if we were doing a good thing.


Mr. Langlois: When the going was getting tough, did Mr. Bristow become more authoritative?


Ms Hategan: Yes, sometimes he got really angry at certain things that the left did.

He started being involved with a group of young people. In particular, there was a guy named Les. There were a handful of people who were close associates of Ken Barker, and they also started doing some intelligence work for him. They started gathering arms. I don't know...they were also arrested in connection with arms as well, but they were doing orders and they were also following, sitting outside houses, that sort of thing.

He was also in touch with...I don't know exactly the details of what he did, but he also had a hand in the intelligence unit of the Church of the Creator.


Mr. Langlois: You said that Mr. Bristow was very good at manipulating and that he was able to be very authoritative. Do you think it likely that he received a special training to act this way?


Ms Hategan: Everybody in the organization thought he was very well trained; he was very good at what he was doing. The way they put it was, because he was an investigator, because he had all those skills and training, not because he might have.... Well, there were some rumours that maybe he was a cop, but people didn't believe them because he was such a nice guy. He was such a great guy; he had so much information. So they just thought, well, he's so brilliant because of his investigator skills.



Mr. Langlois: At the time that you were closest to Mr. Bristow, how did he make a living, to your knowledge?


Ms Hategan: There was an article that had come out in the Sun where Bill Dunphy had exposed him as having worked for a certain company.... Anyway, his picture and his name were in the paper. So he told everybody that he had been fired from his job because of that article and he was currently receiving unemployment insurance.


Mr. Langlois: So he was on unemployment insurance and he had an American Express card? Fascinating.


Ms Cohen: According to him.

Ms Hategan: Yes, that....


Mr. Langlois: I will now move on a bit. When did you get to contact Mr. Martin Thériault?


Ms Hategan: I had seen him around at different court proceedings, so I knew who he was, what he looked like. It was after I had befriended Ruth Mackenzie. I started telling her about what was happening in the harassment campaign and we really became friends. At one point, in July 1993, I decided I really can't take this any more; I don't want to be in the Heritage Front any more; I want to leave. I have all this information; I have membership lists; I have all sorts of stuff at home. What can I do? I want to leave.

I wanted to give the information.... I didn't trust the police, because at least one member of the police force was a Heritage Front member.

The head of the hate crimes unit visited Wolfgang at his home. He didn't prosecute me when I clearly violated my bail conditions. I didn't trust the police, because I was afraid anything I told the police would go to the Heritage Front.

So I didn't know who to talk to. Then she suggested, you can go to the media, you can go to certain reporters, or you could go to him.

I said okay, that sounds like the best idea. She arranged the meeting and we met. Then we continued to meet and I gave them information. He checked it out. He figured I was indeed genuine, from the information I gave. I did that for about four months, until I finally left.


Mr. Langlois: Thank you.


Mr. Copeland: Could I get in one thing for Mr. Langlois? I brought with me two Heritage Front tapes that were prepared by the Heritage Front. One is called Meet the Heritage Front. It was recorded in September 1991. Another one is called WAR in Toronto, which is the White Aryan Resistance.

I'm happy to leave these with the committee. Mr. Bristow is on the tapes, as is Ms Hategan. It might give you some flavour of his behaviour.

The Chair: Thank you very much. They will probably be put to good use, and our clerk will ensure that, provided there's no copyright, we'll make a copy and return the originals to you.

Before leaving Mr. Langlois' round, I would just note, regarding references to Mr. Bristow and the Unemployment Insurance Act, that at this point all of that evidence is merely hearsay.

Ms Cohen.

Ms Cohen: When Bristow was active in your presence, when he was talking or people were talking about their impressions of him, I take it he was quite demonstrative about what his skills were. He was a show-off, was he?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Ms Cohen: And in retrospect, suspecting now what his involvement actually was...would that have helped his cover, if he were working for CSIS? Would that have helped his cover?

Ms Hategan: I don't think so, because he gave too much. He instructed us too well. He was even saying...he had held an instruction session with members of the Heritage Front and he was going to do it again. His cover didn't have to be so well done. For him to go all the way out, actually to harass people himself and instruct other people and get them to do it.... It was more than just intelligence gathering. He started this and he taught us to do all this stuff. So it was more than a cover.

Ms Cohen: But using a reverse directory is something even I know how to do.

Ms Hategan: But it was more than that. Anything you could get as public information and otherwise, such as the pretending and all that stuff, the lying about your identity...that was gathering information the illegal way, but he showed us all the legal ways.


It was also just skills such as how to lose somebody who's following you, how to follow somebody, how to intimidate them psychologically. That was stuff he really didn't need to do.

Ms Cohen: But it would be also stuff that would enhance his...depending on how he used it, it would enhance -

Ms Hategan: He wasn't asked. Ultimately he was asked to provide all that information, to help out people. But he volunteered; he did all that on his own. He was so eager that everybody know how to handle the left. It was like he was training us.

Ms Cohen: But that would enhance his position with this group, would it not?

Ms Hategan: I don't think so. It was just too much. It was actually actively seeking, doing this to people. Even the making up of stories - I can see making up stories. But it said in the SIRC report that he would change certain telephone numbers or addresses, except for really well-known...that didn't happen. All the names that I checked out, addresses - the people were there. He provided information when he wasn't even asked.

Ms Cohen: I'd like to go back for a minute to my other line of questioning. I just want to be clear that you didn't go to any form of legal aid plan to get assistance in terms of counsel when you were asked to appear before SIRC.

Ms Hategan: I didn't think it was done. As I said -

Ms Cohen: No, I understand. I'm not judging it, I'm just -

Ms Hategan: No, I had talked to Paul, and Paul had said, well, I don't think it's possible. Also, the province I lived in was not...even if it was marginally possible in Ontario, it most likely would not have happened there.

The other problem was in using identification, being tracked down to one certain location. It would have made it a lot simpler for them to agree to provide the counsel, I would come down and speak to them and everything. I was as reluctant as possible to use any paper. I've had to use some of it sometimes, but -

Ms Cohen: Could you have travelled at your own expense? I don't want to know where you were living, but were you close enough or were you too far away?

Ms Hategan: I was far.

Ms Cohen: Okay. So you needed -

Ms Hategan: Transportation and hopefully counsel.

Ms Cohen: Transportation money and counsel, or you needed somebody to come to you.

Ms Hategan: Yes, but I didn't want that to happen.

Ms Cohen: No, I understand.

Thanks. Those are all my questions.

The Chair: Thank you. Mr. Harris.

Mr. Harris: Was Marque Poole at one time Wolfgang Droege's girlfriend?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Harris: She was. I missed it earlier, I guess, but what was the reason you said that you didn't cooperate with SIRC in its investigation?

Ms Hategan: Because first they weren't willing to provide the necessary counsel fees for me to come down. The other problem, frankly, was that I wasn't sure what was going to happen to the information I gave. I wanted a public inquiry, not a closed-door interview where I wouldn't be able to defend myself against whatever was printed much later.

Mr. Harris: Okay. I just wanted to ask you about the two aliases you used when you were active in it, Elisse Deschner and Elisse O'Hardigan, was it?

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Mr. Harris: In what circumstances would you have used these?

Ms Hategan: When I came in I was naive about a lot of things. I did this interview with somebody and I used my real last name. Finally Wolfgang told me it's not a good idea to use your last name. My mother was the only Hategan in the phone book. I was also starting to write articles for the magazine Up Front, and Gerry Lincoln said most of the people in it use pen names. It's just pretty much to protect myself. After the fact that I had been charged with propagating hatred and defamatory libel came out, my real name came out in the papers and then I received harassing calls too. So really the two aliases were just to protect myself.

Mr. Harris: Okay. I have just a couple more short questions. Did you help in the publishing of the Aryan National Chronicles?

Ms Hategan: Yes, there was one issue. I had corresponded with a lot of people overseas. There was this one woman from Dublin who wanted to get a magazine started. She wasn't very good in English and her grammar was bad and everything. She didn't know how to go about it. I volunteered to do some of it with her. So I got some information from her and I added some, and I got it printed at Ernst Zundel's place. There was only one issue of it, but that's something I did in 1992.


Mr. Harris: Was Ernst Zundel ever present when you were having some political discussions within the club?

Ms Hategan: Yes, he was. I knew Ernst very well. I worked with him on a daily basis for about four months, and then I used to go over to his place. I lived really close to his place, so whenever he needed an errand done or somebody to help out, even after I stopped going every day, I still went. That went on from the time I joined until the time I left.

Mr. Harris: Did the subject of infiltrating the Reform Party or getting into the Reform Party ever come up in any of those discussions? Was there any type of suggestion that they might have to cover their trail so they wouldn't be seen as Heritage Front members?

Ms Hategan: The only way that was ever discussed was in saying to get people who were well educated and not very well known...even if they weren't well educated. They wanted as many people as possible to join the Reform Party, but hopefully not people who were very active in the Heritage Front as well. They wanted them to just wait and see, just be card-carrying members. They didn't have to go to all the meetings, but when the word came out much later, maybe in a few years, that this was the time to act, everybody who had a card was supposed to rise up and try to kind of take over.

Mr. Wappel: Just briefly, Ms Hategan, who's Al Stark?

Ms Hategan: Al Stark was head of the hate crimes unit at the time.

Mr. Wappel: He was the head of the hate crimes unit of what?

Ms Hategan: Of the Metropolitan Toronto Police Force. He's the one who let me violate my bail conditions. He's also the person who brought pictures of anti-racists and gave them to the Heritage Front leadership, to Wolfgang, who gave them to Gerry and even me. They were used to identify left-wingers from protests, because he would tell Wolfgang when he was about to charge somebody or when he wanted to charge somebody. So the pictures were for the Heritage Front to aid in the investigation against the left-wingers.

Mr. Wappel: Did you have any dealings directly with Al Stark?

Ms Hategan: I talked to him sometimes. I saw him around. I wasn't as buddy-buddy with him as Wolfgang was.

Mr. Wappel: What about after you were charged and you swore your affidavits? Did you have any dealings with him regarding your affidavits or your credibility or anything like that?

Ms Hategan: No, I'd rather not have any dealings with him. I haven't seen him. From what I've heard, he's been demoted.

Mr. Copeland: Can I answer part of that question? The affidavits were originally turned over to the Attorney General's ministry and they went to the OPP with a condition that they not be released to the Metro police. We eventually okayed them being released to the Metro police, but there was a concern about the information in them going to the Metro police.

Mr. Wappel: Speaking of the affidavits, Ms Hategan mentioned she didn't know where they all were. Mr. Copeland, I wonder if I might ask you whether you have copies of all the affidavits.

Mr. Copeland: I thought I had brought them with me, but looking through the material today, I think I must have left them in my office. I'm not sure I have copies of all of them. I have copies of everything I originally had, and that would be everything that was eventually turned over to the OPP.

Mr. Wappel: Would there be a problem with your providing that information to this committee?

Mr. Copeland: Apparently not.

Mr. Wappel: Is there a problem?

Mr. Copeland: There's no problem.

Mr. Wappel: So you'll be able to do that for us?

Mr. Copeland: Yes.

The Chair: The clerk will be in touch with Mr. Copeland to accomplish this task, if that's all right with Ms Hategan. Thank you.


Mr. Langlois: Mr. Thériault, when did you first come into contact with Ms Hategan?

Mr. Martin Thériault (Director, Canadian Centre on Racism and Prejudice): There were two meetings. The first was not recorded and occured, if I remember correctly, in a restaurant, in February or March of 1993. Ms Hategan had been charged and was beginning to be involved in the dealings we now know of. Mr. Bristow wanted to set up a sort of conspiracy against Ruth McKenzie.


So at this first meeting which, I repeat, was never taped, Ruth and I - we're old friends - wanted to see whether Ms Hategan intended to leave the Heritage Front and actually go to the police to work against these people.

After this initial meeting, Ms Hategan, of course, went to Mr. Bristow to tell him she had met me and other anti-racist from the Canadian Centre and the committee of the Native Mission Centre in Toronto.

At the second meeting, in June or July 1993, I believe, Ms Hategan told us she wanted to leave the Heritage Front and was looking for help to get out of the organization.

I have been working on these issues since 1979, either as a volunteer or full-time, and I must admit that when a neo-nazi comes to see us, we have our doubts.

So we first had a meeting with Ms Hategan and asked her a lot of questions. Then we told her: ``If you are serious about wanting to break with the Heritage Front, why not sign some affidavits before our lawyers in Montreal, which can then be submitted to the police?'' This explains the series of affidavits dated September 23, 1993. I may add, however, that there was a series of meetings and discussions that were not about the affidavits but about the Heritage Front and its activities.

We also asked Ms Hategan to give us some additional information, to see whether she was really serious about leaving the group. We wanted to make sure we were not being set up by Bristow. That is when Ms Hategan gave us a list of the members of the Heritage Front.

As for the affidavits, it was Ms Hategan who recapitulated the events and who drafted the text. Our law firm merely copied the text on legal paper and asked witnesses to validate the documents. I think that is a fairly accurate summary of what took place.

Mr. Langlois: Considering the affidavits Ms Hategan signed for you, the conversations you had with her and the membership lists she was able to pass on to you, it did not occur to you, at some time during that period, that you should inform CSIS of what was going on in the Heritage Front?

Mr. Thériault: Since legally, CSIS is not a police force, it never occurred to me to inform this organization of anything whatsoever. When we decided that the information should be transmitted, this was done through Mr. Copeland at the Ontario Attorney General's office.

Take for instance the Kollbek case which is being tried this week in Toronto. Mr. Stark specifically asked for the OPP forces to intervene - like they do in Quebec when the SQ takes over the role of the municipal police - and the documents concerning that case were never passed on to CSIS.

Although I am aware that committee members have copies of certain affidavits and that these affidavits were quoted by the Review Committee, I want to make it clear that they did not get them from us.


Mr. Langlois: We heard earlier that neither the OPP nor the Ontario Attorney General's Department had offered Ms Hategan the protection she felt was her right. That is what I understood from what you said earlier.

That being the case, would you agree that the information given to the police concerning Grant Bristow was pretty useless, because he may well have been protected by certain authorities like CSIS? In fact, since the OPP took no action at all and the Attorney General of Ontario did very little, one would readily conclude that Bristow enjoyed the protection of CSIS, would you agree?

Mr. Thériault: What I can tell you about that as a researcher - because I also work for the English magazine Searchlight - is that I had a contract in February 1993 with the Office of the Sollicitor General of Canada to do a study of racist groups in Canada and their potential danger to national security. In the course of this study, I met members of the OPP, of various police forces, and so forth. I also met Crown prosecutors in Ontario and Quebec. I noticed that when the affidavits were handed over to the OPP, it was a new officer who was looking after these issues and he was not at all familiar with the neo-nazi movement in Canada. So, obviously, I thought he was going to consult with other people to find out what this was all about. He even asked Mrs. Hategan what Grant's last name was, so he really new nothing about the case.

So when the request for protection was turned down - and logically, this officer must have asked other people for advice - it became obvious to us that Mr. Bristow and certain other individuals - there was a whole list of names in the affidavits - enjoyed some kind of protection. I must admit that initially, we thought that it was because the affidavits included the names of certain officers in Toronto's Metro police force that the request was denied.

In any case, we gave the OPP three weeks to conduct this investigation before Ms Hategan publicly broke with the Heritage Front. At the time, Ms Hategan was still living with her mother. Since Bristow thought she was passing out information to us or to others, he started threatening her. We had no way to protect her, but we kept her there to maintain her credibility and to give the police time to finish their investigation and procede with the arrests.

When on November 24 we had to go to court with Mr. Copeland, it was already public knowledge that Ms Hategan was working for anti-racist groups, so the specific information we had given concerning the presence of firearms in certain residences was no longer relevant.

That more or less sums it up. Now, was Mr. Bristow with CSIS at that time? I don't think so. However, it was clear that someone, somewhere in the police apparatus, was protecting Mr. Bristow. I was sure of that, and when we met him in March, when Ms Hategan testified, it was obvious.

Mr. Langlois: You referred to the police apparatus. Are you excluding the fact that the office of the then Solicitor General, Mr. Lewis, was responsible for providing protection?

Mr. Thériault: No. When Ms Hategan testified in March against Wolgang Droege, Gary Shipper and Ken Barker, we had OPP protection. Subsequently, however, the OPP sent a letter saying: ``She's not our witness. She's not our responsibility''.


The federal commission told us by phone that we didn't have police protection any more. Ms Hategan and I therefore decided that there was no way we would show up there without any police protection.

That's when an emergency meeting was held in Ottawa with the lawyers of the Human Rights Commission and the RCMP. Apparently - and you can check this out - there was even somebody from CSIS.

I don't know what you think, but in my opinion, Ms Hategan's protection in a Toronto federal court is not a matter for national security. Therefore, as Ms Hategan and I had decided that she wouldn't go to court without police protection, the RCMP gave in to pressure from the Commission and accepted to grant its protection for that appearance only.

To conclude, it's true that protection is within the jurisdiction of the Solicitor General's Office. But what bothers me more is the information I received from the attorneys of the Canadian Human Rights Commission, to the effect that somebody from CSIS was present at that meeting. I admit that at that point, I started putting two and two together.

The Chair: Thank you.


Ms Cohen: I feel like a dog with a bone here, but - to go back to my previous concern - had the resources been made available for you to speak to SIRC, with Mr. Copeland or counsel of your choice present, would not having that counsel present have alleviated your concerns least you'd have a witness present, one you trusted?

Ms Hategan: I would have spoken to them. I would still have had some reservations about exactly what the outcome of the report would have been, but I would have spoken to them.

Ms Cohen: Okay, that would have alleviated your personal security concerns.

You briefly mentioned the witness protection program a while ago. That has a lot of meanings around here right now, because we have some movement towards defining what it means. But did you ever go to the RCMP and say, look, would you guys protect me, I'm not getting any help from the OPP or the City of Toronto?

Ms Hategan: The way we had done it was, I had learned that in order to get identification changed you had to go to the AG's office, so the guy from the OPP we met was the in-between. He was the one who was dealing with them.

I thought, the Attorney General is even higher than the RCMP. We met with the OPP, and I thought there would be a following up. I didn't know. I didn't know anything about all these things. I just assumed I would be given protection, assuming the information I had. It was just a really big wake-up call. Paul was handling some of the stuff; Martin was too. I was thinking, my God, where am I going to go?

Ms Cohen: I'm trying to get my jurisdictions clear. You were talking to the provincial Attorney General indirectly.

Ms Hategan: Yes. I tried everything. We explored all the venues. We thought that was the best way to go. As long as it doesn't go to metro police, we don't really care where it goes.

Ms Cohen: Okay, but we're the federal government, and I'm just trying to sort out whether you had any involvement with the office of the federal Solicitor General or the the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or the federal Attorney General, or -

Ms Hategan: Yes.

Ms Cohen: - was it provincial?

Ms Hategan: We're trying to provide the context so you could.... I don't know.

Mr. Copeland: If I could indicate, there was not a request made specifically by me to the RCMP or the federal Solicitor General in regard to protection.

Ms Cohen: Okay.

Mr. Copeland: I know Mr. Thériault had some contact with...there was a division of activities in relation to this.

Ms Hategan: The other thing was that after November 24, I was all over the place between the provinces. I didn't know what was happening. I thought, I have my attorney handling some of that. My main concern was just keeping myself going.

Ms Cohen: I appreciate that. Thank you. Those are all my questions.

Mr. Wappel: I have just one question for Mr. Thériault, Mr. Chairman.

What did you do with the information Ms Hategan gave you? What use did you put it to?

Mr. Thériault: It depends. We've done many things.

Mr. Wappel: Did you publish it, for example, in that report to the Solicitor General you were talking about?

Mr. Thériault: No, at that time, actually, Ms Hategan was not working with me. We published it through different.... I did offer and I did provide some of that information to some reporters who were doing stories.

I work, as I said, for Searchlight magazine, which is part of an international network of anti-fascist reporters and researchers. A lot of this, even, for instance, on their connection in Ireland and the situation in Holland, was passed along in Germany - also the Zundel case.

I have also had meetings with some public officials when some of that information was made available to them, in order to try to sustain some activities, for instance, in regard to Ernst Zundel. So there were attempts there.


There will definitely be in the next few months a more extensive document that we will be compiling, including Ms Hategan's documents, but also other sources and research that we've been doing for years.

Mr. Wappel: Did you give any of it to anybody you would know to be connected with CSIS?

Mr. Thériault: No.

The Chair: The Security Intelligence Review Committee did not have the benefit, Ms Hategan, of your testimony. They did, at some point, acquire affidavits that you had sworn. Do you know if any of the affidavits now in the possession of your counsel -

Ms Hategan: Yes, there are some -

The Chair: Let me finish. Do you know if any of the affidavits in the possession of your counsel did not make it to SIRC?

Ms Hategan: Yes. Some of my affidavits were printed in there as quotations. For instance, the description of the IT campaign came from one of my statements.

The Chair: We know that some did. The affidavits are clearly referred to in the SIRC report on the Heritage Front, but are you aware of any of your affidavits that did not reach SIRC?

Mr. Copeland.

Mr. Copeland: If I can indicate, I spoke to Mr. Klein at SIRC on several occasions. I was not at liberty to hand over the pile of affidavits I had received. I did suggest to him where they were located with other agencies, including the federal Human Rights Commission, and suggested that they seek them out there.

The Chair: So it -

Mr. Copeland: I don't know what he got. Presumably he got everything that I had, but I am not sure of that.

The Chair: They seem to have been quite assiduous in pursuing all of the leads they were able to pursue, so I will certainly check that. But we can say there's certainly the possibility that they did ultimately gain access to the affidavits that you had forwarded to the OPP, or from other sources.

Mr. Copeland: Yes.

The Chair: Fair enough?

Mr. Copeland: Yes. I am not sure whether it was through the OPP or through the Human Rights Commission. I didn't have the material that went to the Human Rights Commission, but I think it was the same material.

The Chair: Today we have had, fortunately, the benefit of your perspective on some of the background facts here, and SIRC did not have that benefit. You have mentioned in your testimony that there were elements of the SIRC report that made reference to activities that you were involved in, Ms Hategan, and things related to the IT campaign, Sneaky Dees, the harassment campaigns. I am just wondering if you have in your own head right now a short list or a long list of conclusions or references in the SIRC report that you clearly disagree with and you believe to be inaccurate.

Let's leave aside the issue of credibility. I realize you might take umbrage at the way in which they dealt with the issue of credibility, so we recognize that is certainly one. But is there any other element of the report that you would take issue with for our benefit here?

Ms Hategan: There are certain things that happened. For instance, it says in there, on Ruth Mackenzie, that once she took sick leave and all that he encouraged the people to stop the phone calls. It was totally the opposite. People were supposed to call even further. He wanted to really drive her....

The other thing is him changing phone numbers of leftists, changing addresses. That is not true. I checked all those places; they were accurate. There is not one instance where he had changed the phone number of somebody so we couldn't find somebody.

It says in there, ``In the case of Elisse Hategan, the source told that he told her, `Don't break the law. Do not threaten people. If they say you are harassing me, don't call them back.''' That conversation never happened. He encouraged me to harass people. He encouraged me to call them back, to do anything, to say anything. I have an accent, so I was concerned about my voice being recognized. He and Wolfgang both told me, ``Use chewing gum, do whatever, muffle your voice, but do all that''. That's another outright lie.

It says in there that he admits he called people, but pretty much only two. He called more than that. He called tons of people. I was on the line. He broke into answering machines a lot.


It also says that Ken Barker is the one who ordered some gerbils to be sent to somebody named Merle Terlevski. Grant did that. Grant was the one who gave the order.

The other thing is that it says in there that Grant and I didn't get along at all, that he was very antagonistic towards me and that we hated each other intensely. It's not true. I have a birthday card and Christmas cards in which he signs that he wishes me well. We were together. We did all these things. He taught me things. I got information that I could have only gotten from him.

The only time we really started to become enemies was about July 1993, when he found out that I was asking questions about him. That's when I do believe he did indeed want to break into my place, because I had said I don't want anything to happen to me because I have some information. That's when we became enemies. But from February until July, we were very close and we did things together.

The Chair: That's a reasonable short list of differences.

Ms Hategan: I didn't make all the notations. I read it and made some notations. I'm sure there are other things in there.

The Chair: That's fine; that's a good short list.

There are no further questions, then?

On behalf of my colleagues, I want to thank you, Ms Hategan, Mr. Thériault, and Mr. Copeland, for making yourselves available. The exercise is useful to us from a couple of perspectives. I won't go into the details, but it's been very helpful and we look forward to completing the delivery of the paper, the exchange of evidence that we discussed earlier in the proceedings.

Thank you for attending.

Ms Hategan: Thank you.

The Chair: Colleagues, we'll adjourn now.