Opinion
UPDATED: SNC Lavalin – Just the Facts Ma’am
Opinion by Cory Litzenberger
Let’s take emotion out of it. Let’s take a look at the legislation. While I am not a lawyer, I do interpret tax legislation for a living, and so I decided to take a closer look at the criminal legislation pertaining to the SNC-Lavalin scandal.
The relevant legislation is in 《parentheses》below, but here is the Coles notes:
FACT – in 2015 SNC was charged by the RCMP under Section 3 of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act
《3 (1) Every person commits an offence who, in order to obtain or retain an advantage in the course of business, directly or indirectly gives, offers or agrees to give or offer a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind to a foreign public official or to any person for the benefit of a foreign public official
(a) as consideration for an act or omission by the official in connection with the performance of the official’s duties or functions; or
(b) to induce the official to use his or her position to influence any acts or decisions of the foreign state or public international organization for which the official performs duties or functions.》
FACT – In 2015, the RCMP charged SNC-Lavalin, along with its international division, with corruption and fraud in relation with their business dealings in Libya. The RCMP said officials at the company attempted to bribe several public officials in the country, including dictator Moammar Gadhafi, as well as other businesses in Libya.
FACT – The prosecutor is allowed to enter into a remediation agreement under Section 715.32 of the Criminal Code of Canada , if ALL conditions are met under 715.32(1).
《715.32 (1) The prosecutor may enter into negotiations for a remediation agreement with an organization alleged to have committed an offence if the following conditions are met:
(a) the prosecutor is of the opinion that there is a reasonable prospect of conviction with respect to the offence;
(b) the prosecutor is of the opinion that the act or omission that forms the basis of the offence did not cause and was not likely to have caused serious bodily harm or death, or injury to national defence or national security, and was not committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, a criminal organization or terrorist group;
(c) the prosecutor is of the opinion that negotiating the agreement is in the public interest and appropriate in the circumstances; and
(d) the Attorney General has consented to the negotiation of the agreement.》
FACT – for the prosecutor to evaluate their public interest opinion, they must consider subsection 715.32(2) in its entirety which includes many relevant pieces of information except when 715.32(3) overrides it
《 Factors to consider
715.32(2) For the purposes of paragraph (1)(c), the prosecutor must consider the following factors:
[(a) to (h)]; and
(i) any other factor that the prosecutor considers relevant.》
FACT – 715.32(3) says even with all those factors to consider, you can NOT factor in the national economic interest (ie: the jobs argument) if they were charged the way the RCMP charged them
《Factors not to consider
715.32(3) Despite paragraph (2)(i), if the organization is alleged to have committed an offence under section 3 or 4 of the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, the prosecutor must not consider the national economic interest, the potential effect on relations with a state other than Canada or the identity of the organization or individual involved.》
CONCLUSION – the jobs argument is irrelevant under the law in these circumstances – The prosecution knows this – The former Attorney General knows this – and based on the provisions as written, the jobs argument for SNC does not meet the legal requirement for a remediation agreement.
For these reasons, I find in favour of the former Attorney General.
— — — —
Update: While being interviewed on the afternoon of March 7, 2019, I looked even closer at the legislation and caught something I didn’t realize on first glance when reading it.
Notice at the end of 715.32(1)(c) the word “and”.
While I said this means that all of the tests in (a) through (d) must be met, I neglected to say that this means no one person has the sole final decision. The prosecutor is mentioned in (a), (b), and (c); while the Attorney General is only mentioned in (d).
To put another way, this law is written so that it is not solely the decision of the Attorney General, nor the prosecutor. Rather, it requires both the Attorney General and the Prosecutor to agree to proceed with negotiations.
Similar to a scene in the movies where you see nuclear codes kept between two different military heads before proceeding with the launch, such is the wording of this provision.
This means that the Attorney General does not have the final decision and so any suggestion that she does is incorrect. The decision is a joint one with most of the leg work having to be done by the prosecutor, not the Attorney General.
So let me recap: I think it is quite simple, that a Remediation Agreement (aka Deferred Prosecution Agreement) cannot be considered under the “national economic interest” (jobs) argument based on what legislation the RCMP used for the charges.
If that’s the argument, then the answer is “no” and the repeated number of times asking for the former Attorney General to revisit it over a four month period for something that appears so black and white might be considered workplace harassment if I were to do such a thing to one of my colleagues.
So, since the economic argument is moot, what other argument is there?
We heard in testimony that the parties may have wanted the Attorney General to look at it from a stance that does not imply economic interest.
Ironically, “we need to win an election” may actually be legal as “any other factor that the prosecutor considers relevant” but then we would have to assume the prosecutor would have to be partisan, and that is highly not likely in my experience.
So we now know that there must be an agreement between the prosecutor and the Attorney General.
We also know that “economic interest” cannot be the reason under the law.
So, if the law is that clear on economic interest, why would the Attorney General be asked repeatedly for reconsideration, unless it was not “economic interest” they wanted her to consider?
For these additional reasons, I still find in favour of the former Attorney General
—
Update #2: On March 8, 2019, the Federal Court of Canada ruled in favour of the Public Prosecution Service on SNC Lavalin’s request for judicial review citing:
“The law is clear that prosecutorial discretion is not subject to judicial review, except for abuse of process.” – Federal Court of Canada Justice Kane
Then, on March 11, 2019, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) came to the same conclusion as my interpretation of the law regarding the intention of the 1999 agreement, and said:
“political factors such as a country’s national economic interest and the identity of the alleged perpetrators must not influence foreign bribery investigations and prosecutions.” – OECD
We now have confirmation that there is no legal way that a country’s national economic interest can be considered under the law.
For these additional reasons, jurisprudence about the authority of the Public Prosecution Service, and third party reports about the intentions of the 1999 agreement from the OECD, I still find in favour of the former Attorney General for a third time.
—
Click to listen to Red Deer Accountant Cory Litzenberger on Charles Adler Tonight
Cory G. Litzenberger, CPA, CMA, CFP, C.Mgr is the President & Founder of CGL Strategic Business & Tax Advisors; you can find out more about Cory’s biography at http://www.CGLtax.ca/Litzenberger-Cory.html
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
During the latest marathon cabinet meeting on Dec. 2, Energy Secretary Chris Wright made news when he told President Donald Trump that “The biggest determinant of the price of energy is politicians, political leaders, and polices — that’s what drives energy prices.”
He’s right about that, and it is why the back-and-forth struggle over federal energy and climate policy plays such a key role in America’s economy and society. Just 10 months into this second Trump presidency, the administration’s policies are already having a profound impact, both at home and abroad.
While the rapid expansion of AI datacenters over the past year is currently being blamed by many for driving up electric costs, power bills were skyrocketing long before that big tech boom began, driven in large part by the policies of the Obama and Biden administration designed to regulate and subsidize an energy transition into reality. As I’ve pointed out here in the past, driving up the costs of all forms of energy to encourage conservation is a central objective of the climate alarm-driven transition, and that part of the green agenda has been highly effective.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
President Trump, Wright, and other key appointees like Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin have moved aggressively throughout 2025 to repeal much of that onerous regulatory agenda. The GOP congressional majorities succeeded in phasing out Biden’s costly green energy subsidies as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which Trump signed into law on July 4. As the federal regulatory structure eases and subsidy costs diminish, it is reasonable to expect a gradual easing of electricity and other energy prices.
This year’s fading out of public fear over climate change and its attendant fright narrative spells bad news for the climate alarm movement. The resulting cracks in the green facade have manifested rapidly in recent weeks.
Climate-focused conflict groups that rely on public fears to drive donations have fallen on hard times. According to a report in the New York Times, the Sierra Club has lost 60 percent of the membership it reported in 2019 and the group’s management team has fallen into infighting over elements of the group’s agenda. Greenpeace is struggling just to stay afloat after losing a huge court judgment for defaming pipeline company Energy Transfer during its efforts to stop the building of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
350.org, an advocacy group founded by Bill McKibben, shut down its U.S. operations in November amid funding woes that had forced planned 25 percent budget cuts for 2025 and 2026. Employees at EDF voted to form their own union after the group went through several rounds of budget cuts and layoffs in recent months.
The fading of climate fears in turn caused the ESG management and investing fad to also fall out of favor, leading to a flood of companies backtracking on green investments and climate commitments. The Net Zero Banking Alliance disbanded after most of America’s big banks – Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Wells Fargo and others – chose to drop out of its membership.
The EV industry is also struggling. As the Trump White House moves to repeal Biden-era auto mileage requirements, Ford Motor Company is preparing to shut down production of its vaunted F-150 Lightning electric pickup, and Stellantis cancelled plans to roll out a full-size EV truck of its own. Overall EV sales in the U.S. collapsed in October and November following the repeal of the $7,500 per car IRA subsidy effective Sept 30.
The administration’s policy actions have already ended any new leasing for costly and unneeded offshore wind projects in federal waters and have forced the suspension or abandonment of several projects that were already moving ahead. Capital has continued to flow into the solar industry, but even that industry’s ability to expand seems likely to fade once the federal subsidies are fully repealed at the end of 2027.
Truly, public policy matters where energy is concerned. It drives corporate strategies, capital investments, resource development and movement, and ultimately influences the cost of energy in all its forms and products. The speed at which Trump and his key appointees have driven this principle home since Jan. 20 has been truly stunning.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
From Resource Works
Innovative housing solution minimizes community impact while supporting the massive labour force needed for the Woodfibre LNG project.
The Woodfibre LNG project — a national leader in Indigenous partnerships and a cornerstone of global energy security — relies on a large construction workforce that drives economic prosperity across the region. For many of these workers, “home” is a ship.
Refitted from a cruise liner into a dedicated accommodation vessel, or “floatel,” this innovative solution houses up to 600 workers near Squamish, B.C., while keeping pressure off local housing and minimizing the project’s community footprint.
These exclusive images, captured a year ago, offer a rare retrospective look inside the original floatel. MV Isabelle X. With a second accommodation ship, the MV Saga X, recently arrived, this photo essay gives a timely, ground-level view of life aboard: individual cabins, a full-service dining hall, recreation spaces and custom laundry facilities. It’s a glimpse into the offshore dormitory that anchors daily life for the crew bringing this vital energy project to completion.
An arcade room is seen on a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, during a media tour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
A dining area is seen on a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, during a media tour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
A cabin is seen on a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, during a media tour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
Bridgemans Services Group president Brian Grange stands at the stern on a renovated cruise ship known as a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, during a media tour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
A custom built heat pump unit that allows the ship to avoid using diesel while docked and at anchor is seen on a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, during a media tour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
The main entry and exit area for workers is seen on a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, during a media tour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
A renovated cruise ship known as a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, is seen at anchor in the harbour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
A tugboat and water taxi are seen docked at a renovated cruise ship known as a “floatel” that Woodfibre LNG plans to use to house 600 construction workers at a liquefied natural gas export facility being built near Squamish, at anchor in the harbour in Vancouver, on Thursday, May 9, 2024. The ship arrived in B.C. waters in January after a 40-day journey from Estonia, where it had sheltered Ukrainian refugees, but the District of Squamish council voted three to four against a one-year permit for its use last week.
All photos credited to THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck
Resource Works News
Is there a cure for Alzheimer’s Disease?
Learning the Truth about “Children’s Graves” and Residential Schools is More Important than Ever
The Unmasking of Vaccine Science
Media bound to pay the price for selling their freedom to (selectively) offend
-
MAiD2 days agoFrom Exception to Routine. Why Canada’s State-Assisted Suicide Regime Demands a Human-Rights Review
-
Business2 days agoCarney government should privatize airports—then open airline industry to competition
-
Alberta2 days agoCarney’s pipeline deal hits a wall in B.C.
-
Business2 days agoWhat’s Going On With Global Affairs Canada and Their $392 Million Spending Trip to Brazil?
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta Sports Hall of Fame Announces Class of 2026 Inductees
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoConservative MP Leslyn Lewis slams Liberal plan targeting religious exemption in hate speech bil
-
Business2 days agoIs Carney Falling Into The Same Fiscal Traps As Trudeau?
-
Energy2 days agoCanada following Europe’s stumble by ignoring energy reality