Corporate Extortion

Two noteworthy revelations in the SNC-Lavalin scandal have come to light. The first deals with impropriety, and the second with what can only be called corporate extortion.

First, The Star reports the following:

As former justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould debated whether to intervene in the corruption prosecution of SNC-Lavalin, she received legal advice from her department that underscored what an unprecedented move that would be.

The legal advice prepared by the department set out her possible options on the SNC-Lavalin prosecution, including the ability to seek outside legal advice, but it stressed that no chief prosecutor has ever intervened in a specific case, and that any decision to intervene must be “hers alone.”

“Any decisions by the Attorney General of Canada are hers to make, independent of political considerations or processes, and in the public eye,” the document states.

Compounding the impropriety of the Trudeau government putting pressure on Wilson-Raybould to direct the Public Prosecutor to enter into a Deferred
Prosecution agreement with SNC-Lavlin is the revelation in documents obtained by The Canadian Press of the extortionate measures by the company to get what it wanted:

The documents... 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.

The company’s board and senior management were prepared to quickly bundle parts of the business that had no role in the Libya case into a new entity, putting the “trio of possibly convicted entities” into another organization that would operate “on a reduced business level in Canada or heading into eventual wind-up,” they read.

The details appear to contradict public statements by chief executive officer Neil Bruce, who has denied both that the company threatened to move its headquarters, and that the company cited its some 9,000 Canadian jobs as a reason the construction giant should be granted a remediation agreement.

The company walked back the comments days later in a statement, saying a remediation deal was the best path to protect its Canadian workforce.

A recent news report, which I am not currently able to find online, cited the commitment that SNC-Lavalin made to stay in Quebec after receiving a huge loan/grant from the Quebec government, so clearly, this threat was a thuggish bluff. As well, as I outlined in a recent post, there is plenty of current work federally for the company, even if it is barred for 10 years from bidding on federal contracts, and nothing in a conviction would prevent it from getting provincial contracts, of which it also currently has many.

Trudeau enthusiasts will continue to see his pressure on Raybould-Wilson as a noble expression of economic nationalism. More critical thinkers may draw the conclusion that the Liberal government was simply being cowed by the thuggish tactics of a corporate extortion artist.

The Truth Is Out There

Actually, it is much closer than that, hiding in plain sight.

Judged And Found Wanting

If the true measure of a society is to be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members, Ontario, under the Doug Ford regime, and all those who voted for it, must be found wanting.

Perhaps it is a function of age, but the older I get as I continue to enjoy a comfortable retirement, the more my thoughts turn to the less fortunate in our society, a segment that was enjoying demonstrable improvement in the quality of their lives thanks to the basic income project imitated under the former Wynne government. Unfortunately, despite his campaign promise to continue with the experiment for its intended three-year term, Doug Ford broke his word and cancelled it early, the final cheque being sent out this month.

And the consequences will be severe:

Under the pilot project, individuals received up to about $17,000 annually while couples could get up to about $24,000. A top-up of $6,000 was available for those with disabilities.

In addition to fewer rules and surveillance, basic income was more generous than social assistance, which provides an annual income for basic needs and shelter of almost $9,000 for individuals, $13,600 for couples and just over $14,000 for a person with a disability.

Consider a few of the people whose lives were starting to show measurable improvement under the program, as reported last year:

Wendy Moore, who has been homeless for almost two years, is looking for an apartment.

After couch-surfing for almost two years, Moore, 60, is using her basic income payment to look for stable housing.

“My biggest focus is getting my own place and giving poor John his apartment back,” said Moore, who has been sleeping on her friend’s living room sofa for about a year.

Before joining the program in October, the single mother of six and grandmother of 12 was “barely surviving” on $330 a month in basic needs allowance from Ontario Works, the province’s welfare program for people without disabilities. [Because she was homeless, she did not qualify for a shelter allowance]

But under the basic income experiment, Moore receives $1,416 a month, an amount that remains constant no matter where she lives.

“It is giving me back my independence,” she said. “I don’t feel so backed into a corner. If I want to eat, I can afford to buy something instead of going to a food bank or a soup kitchen.”

Or consider Lindsay resident Kathy Mahood, 53:

When she joined the pilot project in October [2017], she was living on about $735 a month in federal Canada Pension Plan disability benefits and proceeds from the sale of her house.

“I figured I had a year and a half left before I would lose my apartment and have to rent a room. It was pretty frightening,” she said.

But with $1,200 in basic income every month on top of her disability benefits, Mahood has money for rent and healthy food — and has begun making regular payments to clear her credit card debt.

“If I am careful, I should be debt-free when the program ends in three years,” she said.

Mahood was able to buy modest Christmas gifts for her four grandchildren in December. She could afford to buy ingredients for Christmas baking. She can put gas in her car and has money for repairs.

“I feel healthier and I am not stressed all the time about money,” she said.

But those dreams are all over for many, many people. Here is how a few beneficiaries of the project plan to spend their last cheque this month:

Carmen Lord, 46, of Hamilton, who works part time in a dry-cleaning shop.

Monthly basic income: $1,415

Last payment will be spent on making extra car and auto insurance payments so she doesn’t lose her car.

“When I got the basic income in April (2018) I used the extra money to buy a car so it would be easier to get to work,” said Lord, who had a full-time job at a tech-support company at the time. “When I was laid off last fall, the basic income helped me stay ahead of my bills. But now I’m panicking. If I can’t find a full-time job, I will lose my car.”

Tracey Crosson, 47, of Thunder Bay, who moved to Toronto in January for better medical care.

Monthly basic income: $1,916

Last payment will be spent on credit card debt and advance payments for hydro, phone and internet.

“I need to get ahead of my bills because I am going to be living on $168 after rent (in May),” said Crosson, who has relied on ODSP on and off for the past 20 years due to an accident and will return to the program in April. Her monthly income will drop to just $1,169.

“It’s going to be tight. I need to pay ahead on my bills and get some extra food so I’m not starving. If I don’t do this, I’m either going to be dead or starving in six months.”

Dana Bowman, a 57-year-old grandmother from Lindsay.

Monthly basic income: $1,916

Last payment will be spent on grocery cards, advance payments for phone and internet, and household basics like toilet paper.

“The basic income gave me more courage to talk about poverty. It gave us a chance to give our input on what works for us instead of (the government) sticking us in boxes that haven’t worked in the past,” she said. “It’s going to be hard to go back to living on just $667 a month for basic needs … and not being able to afford healthy snacks when my grandchildren come to visit.”

Broken political promises are nothing new, of course, but to break a commitment on the backs of the most vulnerable surely tells us everything we need to know about the Doug Ford government and those who voted for, and continue to support, it.

All in all, not a pretty snapshot of our species.

Putting Things Into Perspective

Many Canadians, including The Star's Heather Mallick, are under the impression that the Liberals are a truly progressive party, intent on offering all of us a better future. Indeed, in today's column, she lambastes people like Jane Philpott, wondering if she is trying to get Andrew Scheer's Conservative Party elected as our next government. Mallick is disdainful of the former cabinet minister's claim that she is acting in Canada's interests:

People in her riding are the same as other Canadian voters. They want a stable future for their children, an effort at preventing and preparing for the climate change that is about to devastate us, good jobs, equity for women, fairness for Indigenous people, and a national pharmacare plan.

A letter in today's print edition of The Star puts into a different perspective the notion that the Trudeau Liberals are making substantive efforts on the climate-change file:

Canada needs green deal to combat climate change
Toronto Star23 Mar 2019

According to UN scientists, we have just over 11 years to stave off the most devastating impacts of climate change.

A Green New Deal would create millions of jobs for Canadians. It would include: massive expansion of public transit, retrofitting of housing and rental units, and building communityowned renewable energy projects.

It is a bold and comprehensive plan to transition to 100 per cent renewable power within the decade, while also tackling social and economic inequality in the process.

The New Green Deal is far cheaper than dealing with unmitigated climate change. Global warming at or above 2 C will result in mass migrations, volatile weather patterns, increased wildfires, food and water shortages, damage to public infrastructure and severe loss of economic output for Canada.

Our community is ready for a climate plan that builds an equitable future.

Jordan Worona, Toronto

The world cries out for real leadership to mitigate the climate disaster bearing down upon us. Sadly, our current government, with its penchant for pious rhetoric and pipeline purchases, is not providing it.

A Very Pungent Odour

H/t Theo Moudakis

The source of that pervasive and rank smell bedeviling Ontario has been found. It is coming from an array of spineless politicians in the Ford government who, upon their election, checked any semblance of integrity they might have had at the doors of the legislature. Today's Star editorial captures their essence:

It’s been said that the shortest measurable span of time is from the instant the traffic light turns green until the driver behind honks the horn.

A close runner-up must surely be the time between a man or woman being elected to the Ontario legislature as a government backbencher and their having lost all self-respect and capacity for independent thought.

Standing ovations for Ford and his cabinet ministers have become mandatory for Progressive Conservatives in the legislature, turning the government side into a crowd of fawning applauders worthy of citizenship in North Korea.

His refusal to surrender independent thinking and “stand and applaud” Ford’s every utterance in Question Period appears to be one of the factors led to Randy Hillier expulsion from the Conservative caucus.

Hillier’s assertion that the clapping is a command performance is not difficult to believe, given that no set of adults would behave so obsequiously of their own free will.

To their feet they spring many times daily, furiously applauding dear leader, even as they furtively scan the chamber to ensure the premier’s ever-watchful staff has noted their fealty.

Simply put, this mindlessness is conduct unworthy of grown men and women, especially those who have been given the confidence of their constituents.

The orchestrated ovations are pathetic on the part of those who demand them, shameful on the part of those who meekly obey.

Prostitution has been called the world's oldest profession. For reasons that I hope are obvious, I beg to differ.

Is Resistance Always Futile?

If I ever had the chance to sit down and chat with Randy Hillier, I doubt I would have much to say to the libertarian Progressive Conservative MPP recently permanently ousted from his party's caucus for reasons that appear contrived. He is alleged to have said "yada yada yada" (the horror!) to a parent protesting the changes to the province's autism funding model. Hillier claims he was saying it to NDP member Monique Taylor.

Now it is beginning to look like that was mere pretext for removing a man guilty of a far greater Progressive Conservative Party sin: refusing to be a team player. Unlike the trained and docile seals Premier Doug Ford has surrounded himself with, Hillier dares to think for himself, refusing to go along to get along, kind of the anti-Caroline Mulroney.

It is experience in workplace bullying I would find to be the basis for discussion with the MPP for Lanark-Frontenac-Kingston. Having experienced and resisted it myself in my last few years of teaching, I know there is a cost to standing up for what one believes in.

What does Hillier believe in? A clue is to be found in the reason he alleges he was bounced from caucus:

“MPP Hillier alleges that his expulsion was an act of reprisal against him for ‘raising concerns of possible illegal and unregistered lobbying by close friends and advisers employed by Premier Ford’ ...

It is for this reason the NDP is calling for a (Taverner-less) OPP investigation.

Perhaps more damning of Hillier is his refusal to provide what all cult-of-personality dictators demand: absolute obeisance and subjugation of the will to 'Dear Leader'.

Hillier...says...he was given a list of what he called “questionable and childish grievances” by backroom operatives.

Among them, he alleges, were complaints that he didn’t clap enough in the House and wasn’t actively sharing posts about the government’s activities on social media.

Party apparatchiks are spreading the word about how toxic Hillier is. (Message to MPPs: avoid this man or suffer career consequences.)

Simon Jefferies, a spokesperson for the premier, said “everything Randy Hillier outlined in his letter is an outright lie. These fabrications are absurd and categorically false.

“This further shows Randy Hillier never wanted to be a true member of our PC team despite repeated attempts by Premier Ford to engage him as an important member of our caucus.

Jefferies also disputed Hillier’s claim that he was in trouble for not seeking permission to attend his brother’s funeral.

Judging by the abject, grovelling behaviour of most of his fellow caucus members (Amanda Simard being one exception, having left over Ford's downgrading of francophone services, a departure that earned her the insult of "little girl" by Brian Paper Bags of Money Mulroney while he simultaneously praised the efforts of his daughter, Caroline Ford-Puppet Mulroney) it is fair to assume Randy Hillier will not be leading a revolt against Mr. Ford's oppressive tactics and systematic dismantling of programs that seek to make life more equitable for the people of Ontario.

Only the people can do that, Unfortunately, with the next election years away, it is a safe bet that much more social and economic carnage is on the immediate horizon.

What Fair Taxation Could Achieve

From the print edition of the Toronto Star comes this response to a recent column by Linda McQuaig, a response that strikes me as eminently reasonable:

Re Debunking billionaire claims of heroic capitalism, McQuaig, March 14

Linda McQuaig is right on the money. Since1980, the top federal tax rate has been cut by almost 50 per cent. If the progressive tax system had not been changed, there would be no deficits and we’d have a surplus nationally.

Inequality is at an all-time high. There is a massive concentration of wealth in the hands of the few.

We don’t have a wealth-creation crisis; there is more wealth than ever before. We have a severe distribution-of-wealth crisis. This concentration of wealth in the hands of the few is simply not sustainable.

Conservatives are always claiming the deficit is a crisis, yet they continue to claim that tax cuts are good for everyone.

Trickle-down economics has been completely discredited. It is a ridiculous belief that when the wealthiest have crammed as much money as they can into their pockets from tax cuts, the rest of us will get the odd $20 bill that falls out.

In the upcoming election, where’s the promise to restore a progressive tax system, where everyone pays their fair share of taxes? Reversing tax cuts is not raising taxes, it’s restoring funding to build a civil, more just and equitable society.

If everyone was paying their fair share, no one would mind paying taxes.

Paul Kahnert, Markham

We have been persistently fed the line that a rising tide lifts all boats. Reality, however, suggests something quite, quite different.