Atkins, Attorney General, CDI, Conflict of Interest Act, Ethics Commissioner, HDI, Holtec, infrastructure, Jersey, Justin Trudeau, Mario Dion, Montreal, Parliament of Canada, Quebec, tax haven, Trudeau, Trudeau II Report, Wilson-Raybould
Lavalin, and then SNC-Lavalin, was well-known before anyone had ever heard of Holtec. It seems that a very lengthy PhD dissertation could be written on SNC-Lavalin corruption. Holtec is becoming well-known for corruption, as well. Why is the US allowing companies that are known to be corrupt take control of its closed nuclear power stations and do dangerous nuclear dismantlement with a focus on speed? SNC-Lavalin is a foreign company, and little is known about secretive Holtec (corporate), other than its apparent owner, Kris Singh, was born in India.
SNC-Lavalin now owns Atkins, as well as Kentz.
From: “Trudeau II Report made under the CONFLICT OF INTEREST ACT“, August 2019, Mario Dion, Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Parliament of Canada:
This report presents the findings of my examination under the Conflict of Interest Act (Act) of the conduct of the Right Honourable Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada. I sought to determine whether he used his position to seek to influence a decision of the Attorney General of Canada, the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, relating to a criminal prosecution involving SNC-Lavalin, contrary to section 9 of the Act.
Section 9 prohibits public office holders from using their position to seek to influence a decision of another person so as to further their own private interests or those of their relatives or friends, or to improperly further another person’s private interests.
SNC-Lavalin was charged in February 2015 with criminal offences that allegedly took place between 2001 and 2011. Under a remediation agreement, also called a deferred prosecution agreement, the criminal charges could be deferred or suspended. At the time, Canada did not have a regime to allow remediation agreements. In early 2016, SNC-Lavalin began lobbying officials with the current government to adopt a remediation agreement regime. Following public consultations, amendments to the Criminal Code allowing for such a regime were adopted as part of the 2018 federal budget.
On September 4, 2018, the Director of Public Prosecutions informed the office of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General that she would not invite SNC-Lavalin to negotiate a possible remediation agreement. The Prime Minister’s Office and the Minister of Finance’s office were then informed of this decision by Ms. Wilson-Raybould’s office. Mr. Trudeau then directed his staff to find a solution that would safeguard SNC-Lavalin’s business interests in Canada.
The first step in my analysis was to determine whether Mr. Trudeau sought to influence the decision of the Attorney General as to whether she should intervene in a criminal prosecution involving SNC-Lavalin following the decision of the Director of Public Prosecutions. The evidence showed there were many ways in which Mr. Trudeau, either directly or through the actions of those under his direction, sought to influence the Attorney General.
Having reviewed several possible means of intervening in the matter, Ms. Wilson-Raybould made it known in September that she would not intervene in the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision.
Mr. Trudeau met with Ms. Wilson-Raybould on September 17, 2018, at which time she reiterated her decision to not intervene in the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision to not invite SNC-Lavalin to enter into a remediation agreement. She also expressed to Mr. Trudeau her concern of inappropriate attempts to interfere politically with the Attorney General in a criminal matter. Following this meeting, senior officials under the direction of Mr. Trudeau continued to engage both with SNC-Lavalin’s legal counsel and, separately, with Ms. Wilson-Raybould and her ministerial staff to influence her decision, even after SNC-Lavalin had filed an application for a judicial review of the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision. These attempts also included encouraging her to re-examine the possibility of obtaining external advice from “someone like” a former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Unbeknownst to the Attorney General at that time, legal opinions from two former Supreme Court justices, retained by SNC-Lavalin, had been reviewed by the Prime Minister’s Office and other ministerial offices. Meanwhile, both SNC-Lavalin and the Prime Minister’s Office had approached the former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to participate in the matter. The final attempt to influence Ms. Wilson-Raybould occurred during a conversation with the former Clerk of the Privy Council on December 19, 2018, as an appeal, on behalf of Mr. Trudeau, to impress upon her that a solution was needed to prevent the economic consequences of SNC-Lavalin not entering into negotiations for a remediation agreement.
Simply seeking to influence the decision of another person is insufficient for there to be a contravention of section 9. The second step of the analysis was to determine whether Mr. Trudeau, through his actions and those of his staff, sought to improperly further the interests of SNC-Lavalin.
The evidence showed that SNC-Lavalin had significant financial interests in deferring prosecution. These interests would likely have been furthered had Mr. Trudeau successfully influenced the Attorney General to intervene in the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision. The actions that sought to further these interests were improper since they were contrary to the Shawcross doctrine and the principles of prosecutorial independence and the rule of law.
For these reasons, I found that Mr. Trudeau used his position of authority over Ms. Wilson-Raybould to seek to influence, both directly and indirectly, her decision on whether she should overrule the Director of Public Prosecutions’ decision not to invite SNC-Lavalin to enter into negotiations towards a remediation agreement.
Therefore, I find that Mr. Trudeau contravened section 9 of the Act…” (pp. 1-2)
“The nature of SNC-Lavalin’s interests
 The evidence gathered showed that SNC-Lavalin had significant financial interests in deferring prosecution. The Privy Council Office compiled a list of some of the most important federal government contracts involving the company. The evidence showed that SNC-Lavalin is significantly invested in major federal government infrastructure projects, including the Samuel De Champlain Bridge and Montreal’s light rail system. An unfavourable judicial outcome would likely cause economic turmoil and uncertainty for SNC-Lavalin and its major shareholders.
 Throughout the public consultations and the ensuing legislative process to adopt the remediation agreement regime, SNC-Lavalin engaged in regular discussions with officials in the Prime Minister’s Office, the Privy Council Office and the Minister of Finance’s office. Moreover, SNC-Lavalin regularly kept the Prime Minister’s Office apprised of upcoming board meetings, of negative media coverage, and of the fluctuations in its share price. The evidence showed an increase in the frequency of communications before board meetings, as well as a heightened level of concern on the part of SNC-Lavalin as discussions continued without substantial progress being made.
 There is no doubt that SNC-Lavalin’s considerable financial interests would have been furthered had Mr. Trudeau successfully influenced Ms. Wilson-Raybould to issue a directive that SNC-Lavalin be invited to negotiate a remediation agreement.
Ce document est également publié en français.
© Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, Parliament of Canada, 2019“. Read the entire report here: http://ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca/Documents/English/Public%20Reports/Examination%20Reports/Trudeau%20II%20Report.pdf
Quebec Pension plan and SNC-Lavalin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNC-Lavalin#Major_investors
Holtec and SNC-Lavalin. Notice which subsidiary they are using for US dismantlement. The one with its headquarters in an offshore tax haven, Kentz. Kentz USA is based in Houston, Texas: “In addition, Holtec (through its subsidiary HDI) has formed a jointly-owned company with SNC-Lavalin Group’s subsidiary, Kentz USA Inc., named Comprehensive Decommissioning International, LLC (“CDI”). CDI is majority-owned by Holtec. SNC-Lavalin is transferring commercial nuclear personnel and capabilities into CDI from other subsidiaries, including Atkins Energy, Inc., which is based in Columbia, South Carolina. Pursuant to a Decommissioning General Contractor Agreement between HDI and CDI and as shown on Figure 2, CDI will manage and perform the day-to-day Oyster Creek licensed activities, including decommissioning activities, to maintain compliance with the Licenses and NRC regulations, subject to HDI’s direct oversight and control as the decommissioning licensed operator“. https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1824/ML18243A489.pdf
St Helier, Jersey
SNC-Lavalin Montreal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNC-Lavalin
Atkins, London: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkins_(company)
Of course, it’s normal to want to protect jobs and Quebec pensions. And, we won’t talk about Trudeau’s PM father’s involvement in the uranium cartel: https://archive.li/4jFZI Nor will we talk about Justin Trudeau’s maternal ancestor, William Farquhar’s, involvement in the East India Company, opium and slave trade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Farquhar, https://archive.li/TG28X Interesting that Holtec’s Kris Singh grew up near Patna, in Bihar, India, which was historically of central importance to the opium trade, and at one point belonged to the East India company. https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/data-and-analysis/bulletin/bulletin_1954-01-01_3_page002.html https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Opium_Revenue