Welcome!

Welcome to our community forums, full of great people, ideas and excitement. Please register if you would like to take part.

Register

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SNC-Lavalin

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Cflgridiron View Post

    I think it was unethical for every single political person that met with the engineering firm on this matter including all the liberals and including Andrew Scheer.

    If it is criminal then a breach of ethics happened. My point was that I see this matter as far bigger then a ethics breach.
    I don't really see an issue with lobbying, companies pay taxes too (some pay a lot) no reason they can't get a politicians ear to ask for things they want to make them more successful. In this case the issue is the PMO putting pressure on the justice minister to meddle in a non political decision regarding a criminal case.

    Edit: I should add that I have contacted MP's about issues related to the companies I work for from time to time (most recently regarding the number of stats Canada surveys I am required to do). That said I have not lobbied the minister of finance to cancel a GST audit on my behalf either.
    Last edited by Bignorm; 02-13-2019, 06:39 AM.

    Comment


    • #47
      Will be interesting to see how quickly this can be swept under the rug. Will this hang on to Trudeau and the Liberals like Duffy did to the Conservatives?


      https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jod...deau-1.5016868

      SNC-Lavalin is a huge employer in Quebec. The province is critical to the Liberals' hopes of a second majority this fall. On the other hand, a government giving special treatment to a Quebec-based company facing criminal prosecution would be a serious problem for voters in the rest of the country, including Wilson-Raybould's home province of British Columbia.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Bignorm View Post

        I don't really see an issue with lobbying, companies pay taxes too (some pay a lot) no reason they can't get a politicians ear to ask for things they want to make them more successful. In this case the issue is the PMO putting pressure on the justice minister to meddle in a non political decision regarding a criminal case.

        Edit: I should add that I have contacted MP's about issues related to the companies I work for from time to time (most recently regarding the number of stats Canada surveys I am required to do). That said I have not lobbied the minister of finance to cancel a GST audit on my behalf either.
        Do you think a MP should meet with a convicted wife beater who wants to talk to the MP about telling the crown to accept his plea deal after he beat his wife again?

        I have zero issue with a company lobbying the government. I have an issue with MPís meeting with a company that has already being convicted of the same crimes they committed again and want to lobby all MPís to get a break on doing it again.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Cflgridiron View Post

          Do you think a MP should meet with a convicted wife beater who wants to talk to the MP about telling the crown to accept his plea deal after he beat his wife again?

          I have zero issue with a company lobbying the government. I have an issue with MPís meeting with a company that has already being convicted of the same crimes they committed again and want to lobby all MPís to get a break on doing it again.
          Apparently, there was something placed in the last budget that allows for this to legally happen. Which in itself is very shady.

          "The Trudeau government in 2018 amended the Criminal Code to allow deferred-prosecution agreements that let prosecutors suspend criminal charges against Canadian companies found to have committed wrongdoing. The measure was inserted in the 2018 budget after a brief consultation in 2017."

          https://www.theglobeandmail.com/poli...f-snc-lavalin/

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by The_G View Post

            Like I said, big news for a few days then it's quietly buried.
            Well what's left of it? How long is long enough if there are no further developments?

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Magnum View Post
              Will be interesting to see how quickly this can be swept under the rug. Will this hang on to Trudeau and the Liberals like Duffy did to the Conservatives?


              https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jod...deau-1.5016868
              They are portrayed as a Quebec company, and they are based there, but they do have thousands of employees across Canada and internationally.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by kbench55 View Post

                Apparently, there was something placed in the last budget that allows for this to legally happen. Which in itself is very shady.

                "The Trudeau government in 2018 amended the Criminal Code to allow deferred-prosecution agreements that let prosecutors suspend criminal charges against Canadian companies found to have committed wrongdoing. The measure was inserted in the 2018 budget after a brief consultation in 2017."

                https://www.theglobeandmail.com/poli...f-snc-lavalin/
                According to some lawyers the DPA is for first time offenders. Not for repeat offenders. Similar to a first time criminal offender that gets a plea deal to avoid jail time. That is the concept behind it. It is very likely that had the conservatives won they also would have put in a DPA which is fine for first time offenders.

                The NDP voted against the DPA and are against them all together.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Past governments have been crippled by cabinet ministers who resigned in protest, and this time could be just as damaging

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Both the US and UK already have DPA's available designed to deal with corporations, so I don't think there is anything untoward about the legal change by the federal government in the first place.

                    I also don't think there is much of a case for pressuring because how could you prove she was pressured by the government in a legal sense? I think this really exposes the government because of the cover-up going on, the public besmirching of a cabinet minister who also happens to be an indigenous woman, two very dear groups for progressives, and the motivation to assist a specific company through changing a law.

                    This story has the potential to strip away Trudeau's "sunny ways" branding and expose him as just another in a long line greasy politicians.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      So I wonder how much SNC paid Bill Boyd to get the Boundary Dam project lol.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Trouble is criminal charges on SNC are going to cost all Canadians. There are good reasons to settle this in other ways.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Hopefully Jody WR spills all the beans like her father says she will.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by DJR View Post
                            Trouble is criminal charges on SNC are going to cost all Canadians. There are good reasons to settle this in other ways.
                            I have a feeling if this was a Western Canadian Based Engineering firm or oil company, there would be support for governmental interference.To me its wrong either way. If Canada has made it illegal for our companies to offer graft in other countries that operate on graft, so be it. I can only imagine what a company like CNRL has done to receive concessions to operate in some of the places they do.

                            We'll hopefully see what she has to say, but more importantly what she can prove. If there is an email... look out.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by squish View Post

                              I have a feeling if this was a Western Canadian Based Engineering firm or oil company, there would be support for governmental interference.To me its wrong either way. If Canada has made it illegal for our companies to offer graft in other countries that operate on graft, so be it. I can only imagine what a company like CNRL has done to receive concessions to operate in some of the places they do.

                              We'll hopefully see what she has to say, but more importantly what she can prove. If there is an email... look out.
                              Funny that this is happening everyday in Canada with regards to businesses pretty much having to have a Native partner to get business. But apparently that's different?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Bates View Post

                                Funny that this is happening everyday in Canada with regards to businesses pretty much having to have a Native partner to get business. But apparently that's different?
                                It is quite different as it is legal by any measure, and under any country's laws.

                                Comment

                                Announcement

                                Collapse
                                No announcement yet.

                                Announcement

                                Collapse
                                No announcement yet.
                                Working...
                                X