Alleged PMO obstruction in SNC Lavalin case

[Remius]

From what I read, appointments to the SCC is a very confidential process, even more confidential than cabinet discussions. I look forward to the investigation to the source of the leaks from the SCC. (SARCASM)

Those types of appointments are made through a section at PCO.  They have a team that deal with senior and GOC appointments.  The SCC would be too far removed.

But remember that the outgoing head of the PCO is "retiring" and has shown his political bias somewhat.  His office is where I would look first.

 

[TCM621]

The ultimate decision on appointment to the SCC is always the PMs.

Maybe JWR offered her advise but it was always the PM's decision. Lol. This doesn't make Trudeau look any better. He got pissed because the AG, who is a lawyer and presumably more knowledgeable on legal matters, disagreed with him over the SCC appointment. So regardless of which story you believe, the common theme here is that Trudeau demoted her for not agreeing with him. He didn't want to lose her intersectional value in his cabinet so he moved her to a Ministry which Canadians don't really care about.  :'(

 

[Cloud Cover]

About JWR being a lawyer. So what? Its an undergraduate degree that for more than 20 years has been almost impossible to fail. there is an articling period. , and some bar admission exams so watered down that anybody with a pulse could probably pass them.  She was a junior crown prosecutor for 3 years.  Hardly Lord Denning. However, in that position whoever is AG is surrounded by the best and brightest that choose to work for government (not necessarily the same thing as the best and brightest available.) 
Her main interests are/were Indigenous rights even if that meant putting the best interests of the country at risk while she was AG. More and more, we will begin to see evidence of this as the years unfold.

I'm no fan of JT and what happened with SNC, but she wasn't the snow white AG that many think she is.  None of them are, or they wouldn't get the job. 

 

[Remius]

I'm no fan of JT and what happened with SNC, but she wasn't the snow white AG that many think she is. 

This.

Considering the opposition claimed she was bungling the Justice portfolio before all this began.  Like Charlie Angus of the NDP calling for her to be fired. 

Now she's their hero.

 

[FJAG]

About JWR being a lawyer. So what? Its an undergraduate degree that for more than 20 years has been almost impossible to fail. there is an articling period. , and some bar admission exams so watered down that anybody with a pulse could probably pass them.  She was a junior crown prosecutor for 3 years.  Hardly Lord Denning. However, in that position whoever is AG is surrounded by the best and brightest that choose to work for government (not necessarily the same thing as the best and brightest available.) 
Her main interests are/were Indigenous rights even if that meant putting the best interests of the country at risk while she was AG. More and more, we will begin to see evidence of this as the years unfold.

I'm no fan of JT and what happened with SNC, but she wasn't the snow white AG that many think she is.  None of them are, or they wouldn't get the job.

Geez CC - why don't you tell us what you really think about lawyers?

I know this was over 20 years ago when I went through the process, but the big winnowing out came in the application process where more than 75% of the applicants were not accepted (that percentage varies from school to school). Over and above that there were the folks who didn't have the GPAs and LSAT scores to even bother applying.

That said we also lost 15% of our class through failures and drop outs. By the time you reach bar exams they are no longer looking to winnow out the stupid but simply to confirm that you have retained and learned to apply the knowledge required to practice law safely without screwing your clients over.

Law school provides a broad and basic education to know and understand how the law and its processes function. It's up to the party and the electorate after that to ensure that their representatives are up to snuff. If you want to blame anyone, blame the political process that puts people (like narcissistic real estate developers and acting teachers into positions of power and responsibility) Unfortunately unlike the US, we don't go outside the elected representatives to find highly qualified cabinet ministers (or maybe I should say fortunately considering some of the current gang of tramps down there)

Just to even out the thought process here, the short list of candidates for judicial appointments is created by a very knowledgeable and talented vetting team who provide a precis of each the recommended candidates to the AG/PM. Very few political leaders (even if they are lawyers) know enough about the individual candidates personally to be influenced in their decision by their own knowledge. They rely on the vetting list (and I don't doubt by informally and confidentially speaking to a few folks they know and trust to help them out in the process - in the past, before the vetting committee, this was the only way appointments were made)

I only take away two things from this latest pile of horse manure:

1) Trudeau appointed JWR to one of the highest most important cabinet positions. If she was deficient in any way then it reflects on his own competence to select qualified and competent people (the buck stops here!); and

2) disclosure that he was dissatisfied in any way with JWR at the time of the SCC appointment had to come from him and/or someone very close to him that he would trust enough to disclose this to. For a leader who is so outraged about "leaks" that he would push for a criminal process against and admiral he certainly seems to be even more leaky (people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones)

:cheers:

 

[FJAG]

SNC-Lavalin warned of U.S. move, slashing workforce if no plea deal, documents show

Quebec engineering firm warned it would move abroad within a year, cut workforce in Canada to 3,500
The Canadian Press · Posted: Mar 28, 2019

SNC-Lavalin warned federal prosecutors last fall about a possible plan to split the company in two, move its offices to the United States and eliminate its Canadian workforce if it didn't get a deal to avoid criminal prosecution, newly obtained documents show.

The documents, part of a PowerPoint presentation obtained by The Canadian Press, describe something called "Plan B" — what Montreal-based SNC might have to do if it can't convince the government to grant a so-called remediation agreement to avoid criminal proceedings in a fraud and corruption case related to projects in Libya.

Under that plan, SNC would move its Montreal headquarters and corporate offices in Ontario and Quebec to the U.S. within a year, cutting its workforce to just 3,500 from 8,717, before eventually winding up its Canadian operations.

"The government of Canada needs to weigh the public interest impact of the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin," the presentation reads.

"We must humbly ask whether the public interest is served to prosecute SNC-Lavalin, and to try to achieve a guilty verdict. Such a decision would effectively lead to the end of SNC-Lavalin as we know it today and has been for more than 100 years."

Of all the options for the future of the company, the plan in the presentation was the "most obvious" to follow and "well advanced" in terms of planning, say the documents, which the Privy Council Office confirmed receiving late last year.
...

See rest of article here:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/snc-lavalin-warned-of-move-abroad-1.5075840

:cheers:

 

[Colin Parkinson]

but they still want to bid on Canadian projects. LOL moment would be them to be charged by the EPA for something they had done down there as soon as they moved. The EPA does not fool around.

 

[Jarnhamar]

"The government of Canada needs to weigh the public interest impact of the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin," the presentation reads.

We committed fraud and corruption and if you don't let us off the hook we'll punish Canada by moving to the states at the expense of our Canadian employees.

I hope the conservatives win the next election and tell SNC to FRO.

 

[Haggis]

So we now know which Scot was telling the truth.

 

[Cloud Cover]

I hope the conservatives win the next election and tell SNC to FRO.

If they win and this matter is not dealt with, don't hold your breath that CPC will be any different in regards to this company.

 

[Kirkhill]

So we now know which Scot was telling the truth.

Cynic.  They were baith telling their ain truths.  ;D

 

[Haggis]

Cynic.  They were baith telling their ain truths.  ;D

True, but this revelation would seen to vindicate the PM and his staff in their assertions that they were protecting Canadian jobs. However, even though the SNC-Lavalin CEO stated on TV that they understand that economic considerations should not be a factor in negotiating a DPA, they still threatened to pull out of Canada.  That would seem to infer that the PM, PMO et al were acquiescing to economic blackmail by influencing JWR.

 

[FJAG]

True, but this revelation would seen to vindicate the PM and his staff in their assertions that they were protecting Canadian jobs. However, even though the SNC-Lavalin CEO stated on TV that they understand that economic considerations should not be a factor in negotiating a DPA, they still threatened to pull out of Canada.  That would seem to infer that the PM, PMO et al were acquiescing to economic blackmail by influencing JWR.

I think "vindicate" is being overly generous.

What it factually establishes is that 1) there was a threat from SNC respecting jobs and donations 2) the PM/PMO caved in to the threat 3) the PM/PMO overtly and repeatedly tried to influence the MOJ/AG to intervene/act inappropriately in a criminal prosecution.

IMHO that's not "vindication" but being an active participant in a criminal conspiracy to circumvent justice.

:clubinhand:

 

[Haggis]

I think "vindicate" is being overly generous.

Agreed, I probably could've selected a better word/phrase, like "explains" or 'clarifies" but I only become articulate on Fridays after TWO cups of coffee.

What it factually establishes is that 1) there was a threat from SNC respecting jobs and donations 2) the PM/PMO caved in to the threat 3) the PM/PMO overtly and repeatedly tried to influence the MOJ/AG to intervene/act inappropriately in a criminal prosecution.

IMHO that's not "vindication" but being an active participant in a criminal conspiracy to circumvent justice.

:clubinhand:

I never said the PM/PMO's conduct was excusable as a result.  I wasn't that short on coffee!

 

[Cloud Cover]

Well I guess we'll know if they release the tapes!! LoL!! https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wilson-raybould-justice-committee-documents-audio-1.5076563

 

[FJAG]

Agreed, I probably could've selected a better word/phrase, like "explains" or 'clarifies" but I only become articulate on Fridays after TWO cups of coffee.
I never said the PM/PMO's conduct was excusable as a result.  I wasn't that short on coffee!

I gave up coffee a year ago.  I see the world in a whole different light now.  ullhair:

;D

 

[Halifax Tar]

A recording of the phone call causing all the buzz these days:

https://ourcommons.azureedge.net/data/ConversationJWRandWernick-e.m4a

 

[Fishbone Jones]

If you want to hear the unedited and original phone tape that JRW made when Wernick called her.

http://thesnctapes.com/

 

[Kirkhill]

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/newsalert-justice-committee-releases-texts-recording-from-wilson-raybould?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0cqViL17gnFgSX-vchxQQl6QLcwHuYJb3jcIrdFIlwiMdz3okEhF2gZDY#Echobox=1553891413

https://ourcommons.azureedge.net/data/ConversationJWRandWernick-e.m4a

Really interesting.  Raybould's recording of her conversation with Michael Wernick.

It hasn't changed my opinion on the overall situation but, having been on the phone for more than one of these types of conversations, and having learned to listen to the tone, I have to say I am more inclined towards a degree of empathy for Michael Wernick.

He, more than Raybould, sounds like the person between a rock and a hard place. 

Is he trying to shepherd her as a member of the Privy Council, the Cabinet or as the Attorney General?  He can't be trying to shepherd her as a Liberal party member. 

Edit - Darn, beaten to it!  ;D

 

[FJAG]

He definitely sounds like a man who has been given an order to deliver a message and get things done by a PM who won't take no for an answer. That bit about "The PM wants to be able to say that he has tried everything that he can, you know , within the legitimate tool box. He's quite determined-quite firm-he wants to know why the DPA route which parliament provided for, isn't being used. ..." I think JWR's explanation about the independence of the prosecutor and that everyone knows we passed this law specifically for SNC and the pressure being put on her to overrule a perfectly defensible decision by the DPP is very honest on her part. So is her warning that she is trying hard to protect the PM from taking steps which everyone will conclude were ones of political interference in the judicial process and the rule of law.

I agree with you Chris. Wernick sounds like someone who was put between a rock and a hard place. At least JWR came from a position of a principled stand while Wernick seemed to understand quite well that the PM had given him the dirty work of trying to get her to do something that he knew she would properly refuse to do. My opinion of the PM (which was already quite low) couldn't sink any lower. Besides his being inexperienced, I now have him marked down as a coward as well.

:stirpot: