Alleged PMO obstruction in SNC Lavalin case

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Oh, absolutely. But as I mentioned a couple posts back, if the vote had simply not been hell, JP or JWR would likely have hauled that fact out by now. The statement to the speaker that it was voted to be deferred to the party convention is both completely plausible, and easily refutable had that not been the case. By all means ask for receipts, but I don't see any room for deception on that particular point. It would be absurd to even try.

Except that it is improper for a voter - any voter in any type of vote - to actually vote on behalf of someone without that right to vote. It is for members of Parliament here to vote individually as part of their role as MP on how they want their caucus to work. It's not for them to defer and act for the party. If they had differed by a few weeks/months so they could each consult their constituent - that is people at large in their riding - that would be OK as they represent those people - not the party.

Also, I feel that there is more blame to go around here, as we are three years into the mandate: Those recorded votes are supposed to be forwarded to the Speaker. So why has his office not contacted the various party leaders yet to inquire of the votes and their records? I think that is the reason he ruled the way he did: He also screwed up.

 

[Kirkhill]

Thanks for that OGBD.

I have been puzzling over the issue of who is responsible for administering the Parliament Act since the Speaker of the House of Commons said it wasn't his job.

If not his, then whose?

In some senses Parliament is the ultimate in self-regulating associations - like Doctors, Lawyers, Engineers and such-like.  Their authority derives from them effectively policing themselves so that the courts don't have to step in.

Parliament says the courts can't regulate it.  But what if it won't regulate (I should say "effectively regulate") itself then it risks having itself regulated.

 

[Haggis]

Given that today the Public Prosecution Service of Canada elected to stay/withdraw (not sure which yet) the charge against VADM Norman, it will be interesting to see their next moves in this case.  Will a similar decision of "no likelihood of conviction" be rendered?  Will The DPP, who decided to stay/withdraw the Norman charge, now decide that a DPA is the way ahead for SNC-Lavailn?

 

[Loachman]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/snc-lavalin-trial-corruption-bribery-1.5153429

SNC-Lavalin to stand trial on corruption charges, Quebec judge rules

Quebec engineering giant accused of bribing Libyan officials while Gadhafi in power

Jonathan Montpetit · CBC News · Posted: May 29, 2019 10:35 AM ET

There is enough evidence against SNC-Lavalin for the engineering corporation to be tried on fraud and bribery charges, a Quebec court judge ruled Wednesday.

<snip>

Wednesday's court decision, handed down in Montreal, followed an extended preliminary inquiry into accusations that federal prosecutors filed in 2015.

<snip>

Justice Claude Leblond had the option of dismissing the charges if he found there was no chance of a conviction.

<snip>

Asked whether a DPA was still possible, Roy said simply: "The director of public prosecutions has made a decision in that regard."

<snip>

No date has yet been set for SNC-Lavalin's criminal trial. The corporation returns to court June 7, when it will indicate whether it wants a trial by judge or jury.

<snip>

The new federal justice minister, David Lametti, has so far refused to comment on whether the government is still considering offering SNC-Lavalin a DPA. Legally, he can do so up until there is a verdict in the criminal case.

Lametti, on Wednesday, maintained his silence on the issue. He said he wanted to ensure his statements did not influence the court proceedings.

But the federal infrastructure minister, François-Philippe Champagne, reiterated the Liberal government's concerns about the damage a criminal trial could cause SNC-Lavalin.

<snip>

 

[dapaterson]

In the"Nothing to see here, folks" department, on the Friday afternoon before the long weekend, with city council shut for the summer and the mayor out of town on vacation, the City of Ottawa has admitted that the consortium selected to build part of its light rail network which included SNC-Lavalin didn't meet the required technical threshold.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/documents-snc-lavalin-failed-technical-score-1.5234767

Those scores arrived in the mail from the city clerk's office Friday — the same day the city released the scores to councillors in a memo answering an inquiry from Coun. Diane Deans, a major critic of the LRT Stage 2 procurement process.

The 37-page memo includes a description of how a bidder could continue in the process after failing the technical evaluation.

According to the memo, subsection 6.5.2(4) of the RFP — a document that councillors didn't see and was refused to CBC — gave the "sponsor" of the procurement process "sole discretion" to determine whether a bidder could continue to be considered.

"The requirements to achieve a minimum of 70 per cent in the technical scoring, therefore, was not an absolute pass/fail," according to the memo sent to councillors on Friday afternoon.

The city has not yet identified the sponsor that had the authority to move SNC-Lavalin along in the procurement process.

 

[Remius]

In the"Nothing to see here, folks" department, on the Friday afternoon before the long weekend, with city council shut for the summer and the mayor out of town on vacation, the City of Ottawa has admitted that the consortium selected to build part of its light rail network which included SNC-Lavalin didn't meet the required technical threshold.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/documents-snc-lavalin-failed-technical-score-1.5234767

SNC signs all around near my place where they are building.  Not much work happening though.

 

[brihard]

SNC signs all around near my place where they are building.  Not much work happening though.

Lots of land clearance and gravel pouring going on down near the airport parkway... I suspect they’re bulldozing the actual route first and then the hard building will start. If stage 1 is an indication, it’ll start testing in 2030.

 

[dapaterson]

If stage 1 is an indication, it’ll start testing in 2030.

#Optimist

 

[Cloud Cover]

Breach of Conflict of Interest: http://ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca/EN/ReportsAndPublications/Pages/TrudeauIIReport.aspx

Despite all the outrage, this likely changes nothing, and he will probably survive. 

Note that once again, the PCO and PMO is continuing to withhold information, and forbade at least 9 witnesses with evidence from providing information to the investigation. Also note that Trudeau received the report on July 19, was able to make submissions on the report, and that in there interim period a CBC journalist (and known Trudeau sympathizer Aaron Wherry) released a book that touches on this matter, and that CBC itself has been promoting the book including a segment a few nights ago on The National.

 

[ballz]

" Unbeknownst to the Attorney General at that time, legal opinions from two former Supreme Court justices, retained by SNC-Lavalin, had been reviewed by the Prime Minister's Office and other ministerial offices. Meanwhile, both SNC-Lavalin and the Prime Minister's Office had approached the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to participate in the matter."

That is news to me. That's really rigging the game ain't it, quite damning. The whole executive summary is damning but it's essentially everything we already knew, with the Commissioner essentially just agreeing with the broad consensus.

Somehow, this has not sunk the Liberals. It's pretty scary.

 

[Remius]

" Unbeknownst to the Attorney General at that time, legal opinions from two former Supreme Court justices, retained by SNC-Lavalin, had been reviewed by the Prime Minister's Office and other ministerial offices. Meanwhile, both SNC-Lavalin and the Prime Minister's Office had approached the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to participate in the matter."

That is news to me. That's really rigging the game ain't it, quite damning. The whole executive summary is damning but it's essentially everything we already knew, with the Commissioner essentially just agreeing with the broad consensus.

Somehow, this has not sunk the Liberals. It's pretty scary.

This won’t be enough to sink him.

 

[ballz]

Watching the news there is some pretty tough commentary from a Democracy Watch representative... I'll admit, I don't know much about the organization or how biased it is... but essentially he's saying that at minimum, if the RCMP don't investigate the PM for obstruction of justice at this point, then those who make those decisions need to publicly explain to Canadians their reasoning. I agree with this. I am genuinely concerned as to why the RCMP didn't investigate before, but given what the Ethics Commissioner has concluded, including the fact that Trudeau and team were loading the deck to advise JWR the way he wanted her to be advised, I don't know how they can't...

 

[OldSolduer]

Watching the news there is some pretty tough commentary from a Democracy Watch representative... I'll admit, I don't know much about the organization or how biased it is... but essentially he's saying that at minimum, if the RCMP don't investigate the PM for obstruction of justice at this point, then those who make those decisions need to publicly explain to Canadians their reasoning. I agree with this. I am genuinely concerned as to why the RCMP didn't investigate before, but given what the Ethics Commissioner has concluded, including the fact that Trudeau and team were loading the deck to advise JWR the way he wanted her to be advised, I don't know how they can't...

You do realize the RCMP - at least much of the leadership - are in the pockets of the Liberal party....

 

[Brad Sallows]

Excellent opportunity for the "experts" to do the right thing to maintain the credibility of the institutions.

Or not.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The PM is about to speak from Niagara On The Lake.  Will be interesting hear what he has to say...

 

[MarkOttawa]

Justin Trudeau's defence of his government: hey, don't worry your heads about any ethical or legal improprieties--we're doing a great job creating jobs so everything's just peachy keen. That, dear friends, is Trump in a nutshell.

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Jed]

Justin Trudeau's defence of his government: hey, don't worry your heads about any ethical or legal improprieties--we're doing a great job creating jobs so everything's just peachy keen. That, dear friends, is Trump in a nutshell.

Mark
Ottawa

With a key difference being that Trump policies seem to be working economically for their country and Trudeau’s policies crashing Canada’s economy, especially in the West.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

With a key difference being that Trump policies seem to be working economically for their country and Trudeau’s policies crashing Canada’s economy, especially in the West.

May want to re-think that: Stocks Slide as Bonds Signal Rising Concern About Growth (NYTimes)

 

[Jed]

May want to re-think that: Stocks Slide as Bonds Signal Rising Concern About Growth (NYTimes)

Only since the Hong Kong situation reared up. The entire world is going to feel the effects of that.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Only since the Hong Kong situation reared up. The entire world is going to feel the effects of that.

Nothing to do with Hong Kong. Its one of the side effects of the trade war between the US and China.

Trade-war worries hammered financial markets again on Wednesday as data from Germany and China showed trouble for manufacturing-reliant economies, while the bond market renewed fears of an American recession.

Stocks and commodities tumbled in Europe and the United States as risk-averse investors raced to the safety of government bonds, pushing bond prices sharply higher and yields — which move in the opposite direction — to low levels not seen in years.