[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

I am watching it with great interest.  From the news reports I have read it sure smells like an abuse of power by UPAC to settle political scores.  If that turns out to be accurate, in addition to the concern about abuse of process -  what an incompetent bunch the UPAC are to be so hamfisted about it.

Thing is, no one knows anything except UPAC. For all we know, UPAC may be right and Ouelette might have committed a crime. But they remain utterly silent, which is highly suspicious in and of itself.

Even if the parliamentary privileges were waived it would take months to decrypt and analyze the content of his laptop and cellphone - and elections are in Oct. 2018.

What is more puzzling to everyone, however, is their utter obstination to refuse to give an explanation even to the Assembly onto the Speaker. Yeah, we get it, UPAC should be able to arrest MNAs that commit crimes and politicians should not be able to interfere in the work of police investigators. However, should an MNA be arrested, the Assembly (or at least the Speaker) should be informed of the reasons why.

Yes, we cant be too certain yet.  But it does look odd when they arrest him but do not charge.  They could have obtained an order authorizing them to seize his laptop and cellphone without the need to detain him. 

[Drakken]

Yup, read that with great interest in the paper today.

The impression given by the media was that the cops were trying to intimidate the legislature into keeping out of their (no doubt thoroughly nasty) business. No idea, of course, whether this impression is correct or not.

If it is, the Quebec government ought to come down on them like a ton of bricks. Looks like that is happening - if so, the government is thoroughly in the right. Amazing (if those are indeed the facts) that the cops thought they could get away with this.

What has come out in the media in the last few days, but is not yet corroborated, is that UPAC seems to be involved in a scheme together with the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF), involving public businesses that want to quote for public contracts. Of course, the important word here is "allegedly".

Since the Charbonneau Commission, those who wish to quote to obtain a public contract need to be verified and approved by the AMF. It was discovered that people at AMF would pass them to a particular firm that would regularize their situation, while some investigators at UPAC were also recommending company owners to pass through that particular firm as well. Allegedly, this whole greenlighting process was described by Annie Trudel, a whistle-blower who worked as a former investigator inside the Quebec Transport Ministry (MNQ) as arbitrary, flawed, and highly costly by the owners of those companies.

Guy Ouellette was, allegedly, about to expose all this to the public when he was arrested. Same also for Annie Trudel. It was discovered that she was under stake out by UPAC investigators, who put her under arrest while Ouellette was himself arrested - for 15 minutes according to her, for 5 minutes according to UPAC - so they could "search into her handbag for evidence that she might compromise or destroy".

[Malthus]

Yup, read that with great interest in the paper today.

The impression given by the media was that the cops were trying to intimidate the legislature into keeping out of their (no doubt thoroughly nasty) business. No idea, of course, whether this impression is correct or not.

If it is, the Quebec government ought to come down on them like a ton of bricks. Looks like that is happening - if so, the government is thoroughly in the right. Amazing (if those are indeed the facts) that the cops thought they could get away with this.

What has come out in the media in the last few days, but is not yet corroborated, is that UPAC seems to be involved in a scheme together with the Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF), involving public businesses that want to quote for public contracts.

Since the Charbonneau Commission, those who wish to quote to obtain a public contract need to be verified and approved by the AMF. It was discovered that people at AMF would pass them to a particular firm that would regularize their situation, while some investigators at UPAC were also recommending company owners to pass through that particular firm as well. Allegedly, this whole process of green-lighting was described by Annie Trudel, one former investigator working for the Quebec Transport Ministry (MNQ) as arbitrary, flawed, and with highly costly by the owners of those companies.

Guy Ouellette was, allegedly, about to expose all this to the public when he was arrested. Same also for Annie Trudel. She was also put under arrest by UPAC - for 15 minutes according to her, for 5 minutes according to UPAC - so they could "search into her handbag for evidence that she might compromise or destroy".

My guess is that it won't do Mr. Ouellette's career any harm: unless the cops make a really convincing case, of which there is no sign so far, the impression given is that he was exposing a nest of corruption, no doubt involving kickbacks extracted as the price of being "green lighted" - and the cops decided to have  slap at him to shut him up. 

[Jacob]

Yeah, right now the impression I'm getting is that the anti-corruption cops are corrupt and trying to silence those who may expose them.

[Drakken]

Yeah, right now the impression I'm getting is that the anti-corruption cops are corrupt and trying to silence those who may expose them.

This is also the impression shared widely among political and media circles here in Quebec: that UPAC is now trying to buy time to find something - anything - to stick to Ouellette and say "told you so" after the fact. That is why they argue that there will be indictments in due time, when they will be done with analyzing all the evidence.

However, we must all wait and see, since the investigation is still pending like a Sword of Damocles over everyone's head.

[crazy canuck]

One thing is certain - the investigation itself will be heavily scrutinized in due course.

[Malthus]

The other possibility is that it was simply a personality conflict between Mr. Ouellette and the fellow in charge of UPAC that spiraled out of hand, without any larger issues behind it. Though the cops using such powers in what amounts to a fit of pique is disturbing enough!

Certainly it will be interesting to see what emerges as time goes by.

[Maximus]

Some of you may know that I don't keep very close tabs on my family. I found out this weekend that my first cousin is a Wildrose MLA.

[Barrister]

Some of you may know that I don't keep very close tabs on my family. I found out this weekend that my first cousin is a Wildrose MLA.

Not anymore he isn't.

Which one is he?  [looks at list for obvious Menno names] Todd Loewen?

[Maximus]

Yep

[Grey Fox]

Re: Ouellette.

Unless he does get charged with something and/or calls it quits. He's uber popular in his riding.

[crazy canuck]

A significant ruling from the SCC today on First Nations s.35 rights and Freedom of Religion

The claim made by the First Nation was that their Freedom of Religion was violated by a development that would drive Grizzly Bear Spirit away.  The SCC made short work of that finding that although they passed the first test - they did believe in the Great Bear Spirit, there was nothing that prevented them from continuing to believe.

The second part is more important - the First Nation claimed they had not been appropriately consulted and accommodated regarding the proposed development in accordance with their s.35 rights.  Their argument was essentially that the only way they could have been appropriately accommodated was for the Minister to refuse the permit - in effect they argued for a veto because of they impact on their religious beliefs.  The Court found there had been sufficient consultation and accommodation owing to the fact that during the extensive consultation process significant changes were made to address all the other concerns raised.

This case is not a change in the law - the first nation lost at every stage.  But it will likely affect the public discourse in which many were starting to say that First Nations did not only have to be consulted but also that they needed to provide their consent.  This decision puts that position to rest and makes it clear that consent is only when a First Nation actually proves it has exclusive aboriginal title to the land.  A very high bar for First Nations to meet.

Hopefully, this decision will signal a greater willingness of all parties to deal with development projects using the now well recognized consultation and accommodation model. 

https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/16816/index.do

[HVC]

How exactly does one scare away a grizzly bear spirit? You know, in case i'm ever in a haunted woods or something.

[Malthus]

How exactly does one scare away a grizzly bear spirit? You know, in case i'm ever in a haunted woods or something.

Evidently, establish a development project in that haunted woods, and have it move beyond the consultation phase.

You may have to stay in that haunted woods for a while for this method to help much, though. 

[PRC]

Jumbo shouldn't be developed.