Canadians: explain the SNC-Lavalin affair

Politics & Elections
21

This is true. I was surprised to find out how hated that woman was.

But on the SNC-Lavalin thing, what makes this so disastrous for Trudeau is that it’s a major blow to the centerpiece of his political image, which, rather ironically, is an image that might be labeled “this is not your father’s Liberal Party”. The image has been one of youth and renewal – a new liberalism characterized by lots of symbolic virtue signaling – and which is now at risk of being perceived as just corruption as usual under that pious veneer, something that has historically plagued the Liberal Party. If I was a Conservative supporter my description of this would be along the lines of “same shit, different day”.

22

It’s also a problem for the enlightened Prime Minister who champions women’s rights and native Canadian rights to be gagging the speech of his female, native Canadian Attorney General, who clearly wants to speak out on this and tell her side but is bound by client privilege - which Trudeau could release her from at any time. That he won’t speaks volumes to many people as to who is at fault here.

The other major factor here is that SNC-Lavalin is a Quebec company, and Quebec is a center of power for Trudeau. My understanding is that the principals of SNC-Lavalin are also huge donators to the Liberals, and that its stock is heavily represented in various government and union retirement plans. So there is going to be immense pressure on the government from all sides to let them skate on bribery charges. If they lose their right to bid on government contracts, it’s going to hurt.

As for Trudeau’s popularity, he has almost none in the west, and nationally he’s now down 4 points on the Conservatives. Provinces are rebelling against his national carbon tax, and his plan to repatriate and ‘re-integrate’ Canadians who left to join ISIS puts him to the left of Europe, and WAY to the left of the Canadian people, who while supportive of expansive immigration want nothing to do with ISIS fighters.

Also, Trudeau is a TERRIBLE politician. He avoids questions in such a ham-fisted manner that he sounds stupid or contemptuous of his people. When asked how he would ensure that ISIS fighters would be re-integrated into society without risk to Canadians, he went off on a spiel about how once Italians were feared, but they integrated just fine. Way to equate Italians with terrorists.

Trudeau rode a wave into power, and people played him up as the great hope for the left. But his trips to visit the Aga Khan, his disastrous Indian trip, his constant blunders and foot-in-mouth disease have a lot of people whispering that maybe the guy just isn’t all that bright.

My suspicion is that he got hit with demands to ‘go easy’ on SNC-Lavalin for many reasons, and he instructed his Attorney General to do so. She refused and resigned. But that’s my biased guess, as I can’t stand Trudeau.

Of course, it would be nice if we could hear Wilson-Reybould’s side of the story, but Trudeau won’t let her speak.

23

It’s OK to have a bias, but it’s not OK to completely garble the facts.

Wilson-Raybould did not “refuse and resign”. We don’t know all the details of what happened when she was Minister of Justice and Attorney General, but she certainly did not resign from that post. She was moved to Minister of Veterans Affairs during the Cabinet reshuffle of January 14, and resigned from that – a completely different post – a month later.

The rumour is – and again, we don’t really know anything for sure at this point – that there was some kind of pressure, however subtle it may have been, to back off from prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, and that her failure to be fully onside with this put in her in disfavour with Trudeau, resulting in what was effectively a demotion in the Cabinet shuffle.

Furthermore, the irony of it all is that the government had perfectly legal options to go easy on SNC-Lavalin, and none of this underhanded intrigue – if indeed there was intrigue – was necessary.

24

What were those options? Do they have the disadvantage of not having plausible deniability?

25

I’m referring to the option of remediation agreements, also known as DPAs – Deferred Prosecution Agreements.

26

Isn’t the whole affair around the fact that the Prime Minister’s Office allegedly tried to unduly influence the AG to offer a DPA? The Prime Minister can’t just tell the AG to offer a DPA to benefit SNC and related parties in an ongoing case.

27

“Unduly”? I don’t know. The central issue seems to be that the influence was improper under Section 9 of the Conflict of Interest Act, which states that “No public office holder shall use his or her position as a public office holder to seek to influence a decision of another person so as to further the public office holder’s private interests or those of the public office holder’s relatives or friends or to improperly further another person’s private interests.”

In a US context, this might be seen as nothing more than proper exercise of executive-branch authority. Not that I’m defending Trudeau on this. When the issue first surfaced, he claimed that he absolutely did not try to influence his Justice Minister/AG. It appears that perhaps he did. And that’s a problem. This is not Trumpland, where the lies come by the hundreds per day and are now just considered routine.

28

One of my Trudeau-hating Facebook friends is practically bursting with schadenfreude because Trudeau is in the unenviable position of having to defend his former cabinet pick (or risk tarnishing his image as a feminist and ally to First Nations) even while she’s crapping on his head.

29

Not to mention the international irony of arresting Heng, for financial crimes, and claiming it’s just non political standard ‘rule of law’, stuff.

While the government is, in every possible way, looking to make new law, just to get Quebec off the hook for what are clearly financial crimes!

Holy hypocrisy, Batman!

30

There’s some background missing here…

The Quebec construction industry has been corrupt for decades as evidenced during the Charbonneau Commission enacted in 2011. The investigation and testimony of witnessed showed a detailed system of bribes, insider information, collusion, etc… to gain public contracts in exchange for political donations.
At the center of their investigation? … SNC-Lavalin

31

SNC-Lavalin is not Quebec. It’s based in Quebec, but is no more Quebec than Maple Leaf Foods is “Ontario.”

I don’t doubt the Liberals will play this up, and rightfully so. “Not a goddamned fascist” is a legitimate qualification for public office these days.

That said, you may be wildly underestimating the creep of fascism in Canada, too. Trump is not Patient Zero of the fascist wave; he’s symptom. There’s a lot of this crap going around in the world, and yes, it’s here, too. Trudeau is utterly despised by a lot of people, and there are a growing number of Trumpist types around. Let me provide two examples:

  1. Doug
  2. Ford

Never, ever, ever say “it can’t happen here.” It can, and in our system you really don’t need to switch too many votes.

I’m not saying Andrew Scheer is Donald Trump (Scheer is a thoroughly detestable weasel, but he’s not a Trump) but if you think Trumpism can’t take over, think again.

32

I’ve seen a lot of this tactic in the comments section of the National Post (Canada’s right-wing newspaper)

In addition, for the past year, EVERY article online has been accompanied with a chorus of posters (most anonymous) attacking Trudeau. Does not matter if the article is about a cat rescued from a tree… the comments will diverge into blaming Trudeau personally for everything.

This distortion of the facts and the personal attacks on Trudeau are (I believe) a coordinated, orchestrated, planned tactic leading up to the next Federal Election. I also have little doubt that certain countries are partly behind it.

Of course, you’ll also get the usual band of Useful Idiots who will parrot these distortions and lies, and repeat them to others.

33

The Trudeau-haters are almost pathological. There is a fanaticism about them that is downright disturbing. They have been whipped into a frenzy by…?? Not sure.

34

The hatred for Stephen Harper was exactly as common, frothing and frequently irrelevant to the discussion at hand. It will be the same for the next Prime Minister, whomever it is. Welcome to the age of Internet commentary.

35

I have to disagree that this was an easy way out. The DPA provision is part of the Criminal Code. It’s not a civil remedy, but something that is to be handled solely by the professional, non-partisan Crown Prosecutors, based on the policies established by the Public Prosecutions Directorate. A DPA shouldn’t be subject to political direction, any more than the decision to charge, or the decision on sentencing. The criminal prosecution process is not to be subject to political direction in individual cases.

It would be different if it were a civil action. There is greater scope for political direction on the civil side. But by the sounds of it, SNC-Lavalin was trying to lobby the feds on the DPA. If so, that’s just as much a problem as lobbying politicians to have charges dropped.

36

It’s not the conflict of interest act that is the issue. It’s that the PM is alleged to have put political pressure on the Attorney General on how to resolve a criminal prosecution. If that is correct, it’s a very serious breach of the institutional independence of the AG.

Our system is different on this point from the US federal system, where the question of the “unitary executive” does potentially give the president the constitutional authority to give directions to the FBI and the AG. We’ve seen arguments to that effect on these boards, and I’ve seen respected commentators, like Gergen and Toobin, discuss that issue as an unresolved ambiguity.

But the PM is not a unitary executive. He’s head of government, but the other Cabinet ministers have statutory responsibilities that are not necessarily subject to Cabinet direction. The Public Prosecutions function of the AG tops the list of ministerial functions that must be exercised without regard to political factors. We don’t want someone prosecuted (or “locked up”) because they’re on the wrong side of a political issue, or spared prosecution because they can pull strings in the PMO.

Did the PM try to pressure the AG on the conduct of a prosecution? That’s a very serious allegation and should be investigated.

37

Exactly. All those statements by the PM that Canada is a rule of law country, where extraditions aren’t subject to political interference, are looking a bit shaky now.

38

It’s not that straightforward. As a Cabinet minister, advising Cabinet on the law, she owed a duty of solicitor-client privilege to Cabinet. But as a prosecutor, the duty of solicitor-client privilege is more amorphous. The government isn’t the client of the prosecutor, and the prosecutor can owe confidentiality to the accused: if a Crown were to hold a press conference and say " I’m not pressing charges against Jones, but boy, he came pretty close to the line here!" the Crown could do tremendous damage to Jones’ reputation. ( See Comey’s press conference about not charging Clinton as a horrible example of LEO overreach, in my opinion.) That’s why Crowns don’t hold press conferences in Canada on the conduct of particular prosecutions

So, I’ m not surprised she’s seeking legal advice from a retired Supreme Court judge. She’s on the edge of a professional minefield and needs to be very careful about her professional obligations.

39

I agree completely. In fact, I too used to ‘despise’ Trudeau. I felt he was ‘not ready’ and was unqualified. And he was PET’s son to boot!

But, now? With what’s going on around the globe, and sadly also happening in Ontario where I live, I have to respect him and support him. For the first time in my life I will vote Liberal (the ‘scandal’ being irrelevant in the grand scheme of things).

40

I didn’t understand your comment about “stinging defeats” suffered by Trudeau’s party - if you mean the Ontario and Quebec Liberal parties, those are separate from the federal party. This is a difference between our system and yours - our federal elections are entirely separate from the provincial elections, and the provincial parties play no role in federal elections, unlike the state parties in US elections. The two provincial Liberal parties share membership and common ties the federal Liberal party but they’re different parties.

I also think you’re underestimating the strong distrust and dislike for a Trump. Since the 2016 election, Trudeau has positioned himself as the anti-Trump, willing to stand up to him for liberal values like welcoming refugees, and for Canada’s trade interests. That has generally played well.