The SNC-Lavalin Scandal - Jody Wilson-Raybould Refuses to leave Office

[Warhippy]

38 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

this is interesting. I wonder why he hasn't mentioned it? 

Because he knows as speaker of the house he had to ceremonially okay any approval for SNC to be in Libya or use the economic development fund?

 

For me this is Trudeau's biggest gaffe on the SNC issue.  He should have mailed dimples to the damned wall over it

[Warhippy]

34 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

Sins of the father....

 

National Energy Program are three words that still make Albertans Go ape****.

Ironically in hindsight that program would have saved this nation and alberta a ton of economic heartache

 

But hey ....Trudeau amirite

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Because he knows as speaker of the house he had to ceremonially okay any approval for SNC to be in Libya or use the economic development fund?

 

For me this is Trudeau's biggest gaffe on the SNC issue.  He should have mailed dimples to the damned wall over it

he might yet. 

 

With the firehose of press over it, it may yet to turn out to be the best strategy to have let that all come out before going after Scheer. Even the legal threat, with any luck Scheer won't be able to help himself and he's say something even dumber sooner or later. 

 

If Trudeau had tried to bring this up a month ago, it would have been drowned out. Now people have had a chance to hear a lot more about everyones actions and its not as black and white as it first appeared. 

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

he might yet. 

 

With the firehose of press over it, it may yet to turn out to be the best strategy to have let that all come out before going after Scheer. Even the legal threat, with any luck Scheer won't be able to help himself and he's say something even dumber sooner or later. 

 

If Trudeau had tried to bring this up a month ago, it would have been drowned out. Now people have had a chance to hear a lot more about everyones actions and its not as black and white as it first appeared. 

I mean if he's actually biding his time before going on the attack cool.  but he looks super meek right now as he really hasn't put up any kind of a fight of any sort at all for this and just let everyone else answer for him.

 

That was one of my biggest gripes with harper was that he let weasels like Poiliverre and Callandra answer all his questions while he sat there looking smug as hell

[aliboy]

17 hours ago, Warhippy said:

I mean if he's actually biding his time before going on the attack cool.  but he looks super meek right now as he really hasn't put up any kind of a fight of any sort at all for this and just let everyone else answer for him.

 

That was one of my biggest gripes with harper was that he let weasels like Poiliverre and Callandra answer all his questions while he sat there looking smug as hell

They are waiting for things to settle down, then will hit a point where they can implement a strategy, one would think. They also need to get some good things happening, like get the pipeline re-approved, get the tariffs lifted and the new NAFTA ratified, etc, start to rebuild some momentum. 

 

[Warhippy]

23 hours ago, aliboy said:

They are waiting for things to settle down, then will hit a point where they can implement a strategy, one would think. They also need to get some good things happening, like get the pipeline re-approved, get the tariffs lifted and the new NAFTA ratified, etc, start to rebuild some momentum. 

 

I don't think it will happen.  One of the things people seem to miss the most is what is happening in America.  There is a volatile man child and a small political army in public office willing to do whatever it takes to make their lives easier and their friends wealthier juding by the legislation they're passing.

 

These tariffs are making a very select group of people very rich.  This group of people know they heard Scheer effectively say give America everything they want because NAFTA is too important and as such know he'd be a far more easy to deal with neighbour than Trudeau and Freeland.

 

They can keep the tariffs up, apply more and the idiocy will blame Trudeau for it in this country.  A lot of American policy over the last 3 years has been to the severe detriment of Canadian producers, manufacturers and our energy sector but is enriching American companies.  Scheer will be seen as a friendly alternative and I have no doubts that some more pressure or ridiculousness can be foisted on us from the US which will no doubt be the fault of the guy in charge in the eyes of some.

[Dazzle]

Something to note: Trudeau Sr. was very unpopular in Alberta in days gone past. Unless his son does something to change it, traditionally, the Trudeau name is blackballed there.

[Gurn]

7 minutes ago, Dazzle said:

Something to note: Trudeau Sr. was very unpopular in Alberta in days gone past. Unless his son does something to change it, traditionally, the Trudeau name is blackballed there.

So buying a pipeline, and trying to get it approved isn't enough for Alberta.?

 

[Dazzle]

Just now, gurn said:

So buying a pipeline, and trying to get it approved isn't enough for Alberta.?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Energy_Program

 

I'm not sure to be honest, but this NEP was the reason why Trudeau Sr was so hated.

[Ryan Strome]

What the SNC board may have known about the firm's dealings in Libya — like the office safe with $10M cash

High-paid former directors could face tough questions if SNC-Lavalin bribery trial goes ahead

 

There's no question that millions of dollars in bribes were paid to the Gadhafi regime in Libya to win lucrative contracts for SNC-Lavalin.

The former head of the company's global construction arm admitted to bribery, corruption and money laundering in 2014. He pleaded guilty in a Swiss court.

 

 

But the Quebec-based engineering firm has long insisted that Riadh Ben Aïssa was acting alone and in secret.

"The Libyan bribes were disguised by Riadh Ben Aïssa as part of normal project costs," former board chair Gwyn Morgan told CBC News in a recent email. "There was simply no means for board members to detect them."

Ben Aïssa has a very different story to tell. He is back in Canada after having spent more than two years in prison in Switzerland.

He has turned on his former executives and board of directors and has been co-operating with police and prosecutors.

If called to testify at an SNC-Lavalin trial, he could expose who else in the senior ranks may have known about $47.7 million in bribes and $130 million in fraud tied to projects in Libya — crimes the RCMP alleges were committed by the company between 2001 and 2011.

SNC-Lavalin has been lobbying hard behind the scenes to secure what's called a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) to avoid going to trial. The company, as well as its supporters in government, argue thousands of jobs are at risk if it is convicted and barred from bidding on federal contracts.

 

But a CBC News investigation reveals why 12 top directors who left the company years ago also have plenty at stake if the case goes to trial. SNC-Lavalin's former board is an influential who's who of the corporate elite that includes former senators, banking executives and members of the Order of Canada. They will all likely face close — and very public — scrutiny if called to testify about whether they knew of any corruption happening on their watch.

 

 

By piecing together public records, including past testimony, exhibits, depositions and separate civil suits involving the company, CBC News has uncovered a string of instances where those board members were allegedly told of financial irregularities — including a $10-million stash of cash kept in an office safe in Libya.

A court has not yet ruled on the credibility of most of the evidence and claims.

However, if the claims and allegations are true, it means the company, despite red flags, continued its lavish spending to win contracts from Libya's Gadhafi regime.

Big bills

In 2008, SNC-Lavalin played host to Saadi Gadhafi. The playboy son of the Libyan dictator spent three months in Canada, visiting Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver in a trip arranged by Ben Aïssa.

Outside auditors raised concerns about the bills totalling $1.9 million.

RCMP forensic accountants have since scoured 44,000 pages of company records. At the 2017 preliminary hearing for bribery charges against an SNC-Lavalin financial controller, Stéphane Roy, investigators testified that they uncovered bills for private security and hospitality that included:

• $30,000 for escorts.
• $180,000 for a stay at the Hyatt Regency in Toronto.
• $193,501.81 for limousine rides.
• Cash advances of up to $15,000.

The CEO at the time, Jacques Lamarre, who himself travelled to Libya twice to meet dictator Moammar Gadhafi, says the runaway tab was submitted by the private security firm entrusted to oversee Saadi's visit.

"Everybody was so mad. The board was mad. Everybody was really, really unhappy about that $2 million," Lamarre, who also sat on the board, told CBC News.

"At the end of the day … what do we do? We did pay it. But we were very unhappy about that."

 

 

Regardless of whether it was a bribe or not, the board raised concerns in early 2009 when told about the size of the Gadhafi bill, according to Gilles Laramée, the chief financial officer at the time, in a deposition as part of a civil suit between SNC-Lavalin and former employees.

He said the board asked him to deliver a "serious warning" to Roy.

The safe

In May 2009, it appears the board learned of another possible red flag.

Stashed in a safe at the company's headquarters in Libya was $10 million cash, according to Laramée.

The board demanded the company stop holding so much cash, he stated in the civil case, ordering that no more than $1 million be kept in the safe at any time.

 

 

CBC has reached out to the 12 people who sat on SNC-Lavalin's board between 2001 and 2011 to ask what they knew about any bribery or improper payments by the company during that time.

"Absolutely nothing," said Gwyn Morgan, the only board member to provide substantive answers. Most declined to comment or never responded.

 

 

He says the board was completely in the dark about how Ben Aïssa was using company money and whether he was paying kickbacks to the Gadhafis.

"I have no reason to believe that other management members were aware of his cleverly disguised deeds either," said Morgan, who served on the board for eight years. He was chair in 2012 when the bribery allegations first made headlines.

 

 

The board at the time comprised luminaries of the corporate world, including Sen. Hugh Segal, former senator and Liberal Party executive Lorna Marsden, four members of the Order of Canada, and heavyweights from the banking, energy and railways sectors.

Party for 50 Cent

Despite the board's apparent concerns only months earlier, nothing stopped executives from hosting Saadi Gadhafi again in September 2009, when he attended the Toronto International Film Festival.

SNC-Lavalin again picked up the tab. It paid $430,767 for the much shorter visit that included the following receipts:

• $107,413 for a private party with rapper 50 Cent and 200 guests.
• $33,005.70 for limousine services.
• $200,000 for the Park Hyatt stay of 50 Cent and his entourage.

The RCMP alleges all the money spent on Gadhafi, a foreign official involved in awarding SNC-Lavalin contracts, amounted to bribery.

But the Roy case was dismissed in February due to delays getting to trial. That means a judge has never ruled on whether these payments were illegal or whether anyone else knew what was going on.

 

 

"The company, the CEO, the office of the president, the board of directors — they were aware of Saadi Gadhafi's visits," Ben Aïssa testified in the Roy preliminary hearing. "There were a whole series of prior authorizations for the visit."

Former board member Gwyn Morgan denied Ben Aïssa's claim in an email to CBC News.

"The hostings were arranged by Riadh Ben Aïssa without the board's knowledge, like other regrettable things we now know he did."

 

 

Ben Aïssa also contends in the various proceedings that CEO Lamarre signed off on buying Saadi Gadhafi a $38-million yacht in 2007 to win a $450-million contract in Libya, and that Lamarre's successor as CEO, Pierre Duhaime, even discussed buying Gadhafi a jet.

Lamarre denies the claim. He told CBC News he only read about the yacht in the newspaper after leaving the company and that it was all Ben Aïssa's doing.

Between 2001 and 2011, SNC-Lavalin won contracts in Libya totalling at least $1.85 billion.

 

"These were contracts we got thanks to the influence, to the involvement of Saadi Gadhafi," Ben Aïssa testified in 2017 in the Roy case.

"I didn't do this on my own. The company pushed me to do it. I'm a company man. I did what the company asked me to do. Yes, it was criminal. I pleaded guilty."

 

 

The SNC-Lavalin case is the biggest corporate corruption proceeding in Canadian history, and raises questions about corporate governance and responsibility.

The firm's former board members, with deep corporate experience, collectively received millions of dollars in compensation, and were responsible for overseeing one of the largest companies in the country.

"Is a member of the board of directors not going to ask the question, 'How are we getting all of these contracts in Libya?' I mean really!" said Patricia Adams, executive director of Probe International, a government and corporate watchdog group based in Toronto.

 

 

"What's your role on the board if not to protect the corporation from acts of bribery and from doing things that are illegal?"

At least four members of the board at the time had MBAs. Pierre Lessard is a fellow of the Quebec Order of Professional Chartered Accountants. Claude Mongeau, who sat on the SNC-Lavalin board's audit committee for 11 years, was named Canadian chief financial officer of the year in 2005 while at CN.

In October 2018, SNC-Lavalin, including the former board directors, settled a $110-million class action lawsuit by shareholders. The plaintiffs had claimed the company failed to disclose improper payments, prompting the company's stock to tank after the bribery scandal was exposed.

No one admitted any wrongdoing.

Tens of millions in 'improper payments'

Ben Aïssa claims he travelled to Libya in August 2011, after civil war had broken out, and successfully recouped $100 million owed to SNC-Lavalin for its work on construction projects. In civil suit documents, he claims he received a standing ovation from the board when he returned.

Soon after, the Gadhafi regime was toppled. Members of the family faced international sanctions, including a United Nations resolution that banned them from leaving the country.

 

 

In February 2012, CBC broke the news that Roy was detained in Mexico as part of an alleged plot to smuggle Saadi Gadhafi out of Libya to a life in hiding.

That very day, the company hired law firm Stikeman Elliott to launch an independent review.

The findings sparked massive upheaval at the company. SNC-Lavalin announced the review had found breakdowns in its internal ethics protocols and millions in "improper payments" on projects in several countries.

 

 

SNC-Lavalin has undergone a major overhaul since 2012.

It is appealing once again to the Federal Court in a bid to force prosecutors to consider an out-of-court settlement. In court documents filed April 4, the company trumpets "the complete turn-over of SNC-Lavalin's senior management and Board of Directors, since the events in question" as one of the reasons it should be granted a DPA.

But the documents reveal for the first time why prosecutors have denied SNC-Lavalin a DPA, stating the company doesn't qualify for three reasons:

• The "nature and gravity" of the case.
• The "degree of involvement of senior officers of the organization."
• The fact that SNC-Lavalin "did not self-report" the alleged crimes that are at the centre of the case.

A judge is expected to rule May 29 on whether the case will go to trial.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/snc-lavalin-trial-board-1.5096153

[BPA]

But the documents reveal for the first time why prosecutors have denied SNC-Lavalin a DPA, stating the company doesn't qualify for three reasons:

• The "nature and gravity" of the case.
• The "degree of involvement of senior officers of the organization."
• The fact that SNC-Lavalin "did not self-report" the alleged crimes that are at the centre of the case.

Copied from above news article.

 

Gee.  Would have been nice if JWR submitted that in writing to JT to settle the matter on why they didn't use the DPA.

[JM_]

This is pretty damning. Greenspan is probably the most influential lawyer in Canada. It also explains the system perfectly. 

 

Opinion

Did Jody Wilson-Raybould understand her role as attorney-general?

 

Brian Greenspan

Contributed to The Globe and Mail 

Published April 17, 2019Updated 3 hours ago

250 Comments

Brian Greenspan is past president of the Criminal Lawyers’ Association, founding chair of the Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers and the recipient of an honorary doctor of laws from the Law Society of Ontario. 

 

The reputation and integrity of the administration of criminal justice in Canada has recently been challenged by critics who betray a fundamental misunderstanding of the responsibilities of key participants in our justice system. Regrettably, these misconceptions have been fuelled by our former attorney-general, Jody Wilson-Raybould.

 

There is no question that the attorney-general must exercise her role objectively and independently. However, in a free and democratic society, the prosecutorial function does not operate in a vacuum, in isolation and immune from debate, discussion and, indeed, persuasion. Isolation breeds tyranny. Access to justice requires those who administer justice to be accessible, to be open to advocacy on behalf of clients and causes. Advocacy in the adversarial process does not undermine independence. In fact, the public interest is best served by ensuring that the decision-maker has meaningfully examined the conflicting positions and has been exposed to a comprehensive review of all relevant considerations.

 

Over the course of more than 45 years as defence counsel, I have often advanced controversial positions. I have repeatedly and unrepentantly attempted to persuade prosecutors and courts that they ought to exercise their discretion, in the public interest, in a manner favourable to what I have urged was a just result. Prosecutors routinely take public-interest considerations into account in the exercise of their quasi-judicial discretion. Every decision to prosecute, every application for bail and every sentence imposed on a convicted offender engages a consideration of the public interest. As well, the public interest is a vital consideration in resolution discussions which routinely take place in private settings, often in teleconferences, frequently in direct personal meetings, but never surreptitiously recorded. When I wasn’t satisfied that a Crown had fairly or properly evaluated my submissions, I would, on occasion, resort to further meetings with supervising prosecutors. If I concluded that legal principles or mitigating circumstances had been ignored and that the path to resolution had not been exhausted, I might arrange a meeting with an assistant deputy attorney-general or, on rare occasions, with either the attorney-general of the province or the attorney-general of Canada. This process does not challenge independence; it ensures its vitality.

 

If an attorney-general can receive such vigorous advocacy and remain objective, then certainly her objectivity can also withstand collegial conversations with government colleagues and bureaucrats in which they share their views and opinions on the merits of a prosecution. Thoughtful reconsideration and sober second thoughts do not threaten the independence of the attorney-general nor do they jeopardize the integrity of our justice system.

 

Ms. Wilson-Raybould has expressed the position that any intervention by the attorney-general with the decision of the director of public prosecutions (DPP) would have been automatically suspect and that it would risk calling into question prosecutorial independence and the rule of law. The DPP, in fact, fulfills her responsibility under and on behalf of the attorney-general, and the act which governs her authority empowers the attorney-general to assume carriage of a prosecution or to direct the director. The attorney-general’s power to superintend prosecutions is an important aspect of our system. The former attorney-general treated the DPP as essentially unreviewable. Politically accountable oversight in ensuring that the public interest is properly taken into account isn’t anathema to the rule of law. The attorney-general’s power to superintend prosecutions is an integral part of our justice system.

 

The DPP is expressly mandated to notify the attorney-general if a case “raises important questions of general interest.” The conviction of SNC-Lavalin would affect thousands of people, including employees, pensioners and shareholders who were innocent bystanders to the alleged wrongdoing. In fact, one of the key underlying objectives of remediation agreements is to reduce the collateral negative consequences to those not engaged in the wrongdoing. The DPP fulfilled her responsibility to notify the attorney-general, recognizing that this case raised important questions of public interest. However, rather than address, assess or weigh the competing positions, the attorney-general appears to have reflexively deferred to the DPP and abdicated her responsibility for vigorous and independent oversight.

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-did-jody-wilson-raybould-understand-her-role-as-attorney-general/

[RUPERTKBD]

Word from Global News is that after being a guest at Elizabeth May's wedding, JWR is considering running for the Greens in the upcoming election.

 

I'm a bit surprised it's not the Cons, but I think it's a good thing overall. If the public is truly behind her, she'll contribute a seat in Parliament to a party that badly needs one. Just a small step towards giving voters a legitimate 4th option at the polls.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

19 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Word from Global News is that after being a guest at Elizabeth May's wedding, JWR is considering running for the Greens in the upcoming election.

 

That actually is a pretty good idea inviting JWR to weddings.  She’s pretty good at recording events without being too intrusive.

[PhillipBlunt]

4 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

That actually is a pretty good idea inviting JWR to weddings.  She’s pretty good at recording events without being too intrusive.

Awesome. I think you just found JWR a new career. 

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

That actually is a pretty good idea inviting JWR to weddings.  She’s pretty good at recording events without being too intrusive.

post of the month candidate.

[JM_]

2 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Word from Global News is that after being a guest at Elizabeth May's wedding, JWR is considering running for the Greens in the upcoming election.

 

I'm a bit surprised it's not the Cons, but I think it's a good thing overall. If the public is truly behind her, she'll contribute a seat in Parliament to a party that badly needs one. Just a small step towards giving voters a legitimate 4th option at the polls.

I guess. These grudge floor crossings rarely work out to anything substantial. I guess it would be nice for Lizzy to have a friend tho. 

[RUPERTKBD]

3 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I guess. These grudge floor crossings rarely work out to anything substantial. I guess it would be nice for Lizzy to have a friend tho. 

She has no choice but to cross the floor if she wants to stay in federal politics.

 

I think it would be fairly easy for voters to send her back to Parliament as a Conservative, but as a Green, voters in her riding are going to have to decide how much they still support her.

[Ryan Strome]

9 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Word from Global News is that after being a guest at Elizabeth May's wedding, JWR is considering running for the Greens in the upcoming election.

 

I'm a bit surprised it's not the Cons, but I think it's a good thing overall. If the public is truly behind her, she'll contribute a seat in Parliament to a party that badly needs one. Just a small step towards giving voters a legitimate 4th option at the polls.

Remember,  May considered stepping down as leader a while back, possible replacement?

7 hours ago, Jimmy McGill said:

I guess. These grudge floor crossings rarely work out to anything substantial. I guess it would be nice for Lizzy to have a friend tho. 

I have always hated floor crossings I like Kenneys approach you will have to run in a bye election if you cross the floor. I don't want to get into the economics of it it's the principle.

 

7 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

She has no choice but to cross the floor if she wants to stay in federal politics.

 

I think it would be fairly easy for voters to send her back to Parliament as a Conservative, but as a Green, voters in her riding are going to have to decide how much they still support her.

She could run as an independent. That being said I think she could win as a Green candidate. It's my understanding she is very popular in her riding. I think @Jimmy McGill lives in her riding.

[JM_]

35 minutes ago, Ryan Strome said:

 

I have always hated floor crossings I like Kenneys approach you will have to run in a bye election if you cross the floor.

damn you, now I know I agree with Kenney on something.