According to the National Observer, the Trudeau government announced a confidential deal with SNC, just “four days after Trudeau’s first throne speech in 2015.”
The National Observer article goes into far more depth, and I suggest you give their article a read, and maybe even subscribe to continue helping their public service journalism.
The deal between SNC and the federal government was the first under the new “integrity regime.” No other company has reached such a deal since.
The former Harper government created Canada’s “integrity regime,” in 2015 “to ensure the government does business solely with ethical partners.”
The integrity regime allows businesses to continue operating while working to meet ethical demands. In the case of SNC-Lavalin, that involves working to fix the company’s history of bribery, specifically $48 million paid to secure contracts in Libya.
Although Libya is only one of the many public cases of misconduct SNC-Lavalin faces. For example, in April 2013, the World Bank “banned SNC-Lavalin and its 100 subsidiaries from bidding on projects funded by the development agency for 10 years, citing company misconduct in Bangladesh, as well as in Cambodia.”
Back to the story at hand, this timeline looks awful for the Trudeau government which already faces a serious public and international outcry over their dealings with SNC-Lavalin.
The Trudeau government now appears to have connected themselves to securing a future for SNC-Lavalin from the very first days of their government. Following that early commitment with more and more pressure.
For example, according the Jody Wilson-Raybould, the individual most Canadians believe, she was repeatedly lobbied by the PMO to find a solution to the SNC-Lavalin charges, even though she clearly stated the company does not qualify for a remediation agreement.
According to Gerald Butts though, the AG had the duty to consider all new evidence, making the AG’s decision not permanent.
No new legitimate evidence has been brought forward by anyone, as a drop in stock price does not actually change the facts on the ground.
Instead, the PMO repeatedly lobbied for a second set of eyes. That is not new evidence, that is a different opinion based on the exact same evidence.
What do you think about this rapidly developing story? Join the conversation by commenting below!
Join and support independent free thinkers!
We’re independent and can’t be cancelled. The establishment media is increasingly dedicated to divisive cancel culture, corporate wokeism, and political correctness, all while covering up corruption from the corridors of power. The need for fact-based journalism and thoughtful analysis has never been greater. When you support The Post Millennial, you support freedom of the press at a time when it's under direct attack. Join the ranks of independent, free thinkers by supporting us today for as little as $1.
Remind me next month
To find out what personal data we collect and how we use it, please visit our Privacy Policy
