That's not what I heard.There was no attempt or intention to alter or arrange for a particular verdict.
That's not what I heard.There was no attempt or intention to alter or arrange for a particular verdict.
TORONTO - The head of SNC-Lavalin says its role as a Canadian global champion will be undermined if the embattled engineering firm is barred from bidding on federal contracts and its local employees are forced to work for foreign competitors.
In an interview with The Canadian Press, Neil Bruce says the Montreal-based company, unlike the Trudeau government, has never cited the protection of 9,000 Canadian jobs as a reason it should be granted a remediation agreement to avoid a criminal trial.
However, he says there's a public interest for such an agreement because its well-qualified employees will be forced to work for U.S. or European competitors if it is barred from bidding on federal contracts for a decade.
SNC-Lavalin faces accusations it paid bribes to get government business in Libya — a criminal case that has triggered a political storm and cost Prime Minister Justin Trudeau two cabinet ministers and his most trusted adviser.
Bruce says about 75 per cent of the company's rivals have concluded deferred prosecution agreements in their host countries and are free to work in Canada.
Meanwhile, Bruce says he still doesn't know why a federal official and former attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould were not open to granting a remediation agreement.
True, Because there is a concerted effort to burry the whole matter. trudOWE can not afford to have SNC brought before the court.There was no attempt or intention to alter or arrange for a particular verdict.
Hey , look over there .
Conservative MP, Candice Bergen calls Trudeau what he is.
A FAKE FEMINIST.
While yet another of his female MP's resigns in the wake of the SNC LAVALIN scandal.
Conservative MP, Candice Bergen calls Trudeau what he is.
A FAKE FEMINIST.
While yet another of his female MP's resigns in the wake of the SNC LAVALIN scandal.
A politician telling a judge how to rule wouldn't even show up on the radar in the United States. Those from there who actually know what they're talking about must wonder what all of the fuss is about in Canada.
The President of the United States is more corrupt than Caligula and Little Potato may be in over his head but he is hardly "Mr.Big".
Q: Now there’s an Ethics Commissioner investigation. Michael Wernick seemed to have a lot of confidence in the Ethics Commissioner. Do you think that can capture everything that needs capturing?
A: My sense is that they will not have the appropriate tools to be able to get at all of this.
Q: What’s missing?
A: If nothing wrong took place, then why don’t we waive privilege on the whole issue and let those who have something to say on it speak their minds and share their stories?
Q: All of this has been raised in the context of something called the Shawcross doctrine. Part of the Shawcross doctrine holds that if an attorney general feels that she is the subject of inappropriate pressure, she should resign immediately. Is that your understanding of the doctrine, and what do you say to people, including Gerry Butts and others, who asked why she didn’t raise it at the time?
A: I would not consider myself an expert on the Shawcross doctrine. But I have heard people raise that concern. Here’s what I would have to say about that — and of course the former attorney general is the person who can best speak for why she didn’t resign at the time. I see it as her having her finger in the dike. She essentially singlehandedly was upholding the independence of the justice system on this criminal trial — supported of course by the fact that the Director of Public Prosecution was the first one who said they don’t qualify for a DPA, based on law that was put in place in our last budget bill. So that was where the decision was made. The former AG didn’t want to override that, and she had her finger in the dike and said no repeatedly. She may have felt that, if she were to resign, that that would put the independence of the justice system at risk.
There’s one answer to that. Another answer to that is, from the perspective of somebody who is under pressure and perhaps being harassed, it’s incredibly hard – if you talk to people who are harassed in any capacity, to maintain relationships and to find the right time to be able to speak up about the fact that you are being treated that way. So you know, I think if you look at examples of other types of bullying or harassment, it’s not necessarily as easy as people might think to speak to those who are inflicting it upon you.
Q: Mr. Butts said, essentially, ‘Come on, this doesn’t rise to the level of harassment, or bugging, or even sustained engagement. It’s 20 interactions over four months. It’s two phone calls and two meetings per month.’
A: The constitutional principle of the independence of the justice system is such that the attorney general of our country should not be subjected to political interference in any way. Whether there is one attempt to interfere or whether there are 20 attempts to interfere, that crosses ethical and constitutional lines...……..much more in link