Author: Ronnie

Posted on

Bit Of History: Peter MacKay Shanks David Orchard In 2003 PC Leadership Race

(Peter Mackay pledges – in writing – no merger with Alliance if he wins)

(Peter MacKay sticking the knife in again?)

1. Important Links


CLICK HERE, for the Peter McKay/David Orchard alliance.
http://archive.is/DJ6M8
CLICK HERE, for CBC article on the broken deal.
http://archive.is/fAEgs
CLICK HERE, for ONSC denying Orchard’s application in full.
http://archive.is/niIKc
CLICK HERE, for an ONSC judge refusing costs for defamation.
http://archive.is/NgxG0
CLICK HERE, for Orchard’s ON Court of Appeal Factum.
http://archive.is/nsX0V/image
CLICK HERE, for ONCA dismissing appeal/cross appeal/motion.
http://archive.is/nBrOy
CLICK HERE, for Stevens v. CPC, Federal Court of Canada.
http://archive.is/iwCyI
CLICK HERE, for Stevens v. CPC, Federal Court of Appeal.
http://archive.is/6S6am

CLICK HERE, for a May 2019 article on replacing Scheer (before election).
http://archive.is/ZPFdF
CLICK HERE, for MacKay commenting on Scheer’s 2019 loss.
http://archive.is/SFvWr

2. Context For This Article


In 2003, the current Conservative Party of Canada did not exist. Instead, there was the Alliance Party, led by Stephen Harper, and the Progressive Conservative Party, undergoing a leadership race.

Two candidates in that race, David Orchard and Peter Mackay, struck a deal: Orchard would support MacKay’s leadership bid in return for a written pledge not to pursue a merger or deal with the Alliance. At that time, a merger had been seriously considered, as a way to form a united alternative to the Liberal Party. But MacKay promised — in writing — not to pursue this if he was supported for leader of the Progressive Conservative leadership.

The deal went ahead as planned (so it seemed), and MacKay became leader of the party. However, it appeared he had no intention of honouring his deal. Almost immediately, he pursued merger talks with the Alliance. The eventually merged, and the new party formed government from 2006 until 2015. MacKay’s deceptive and underhanded tactics had won in the long term.

Fast forward more than a decade from 2003, and another controversy. See section #9 for more on that.

3. Text Of McKay/Orchard Deal

May 31, 2003 Agreement between Peter MacKay and David Orchard
1) No merger, joint candidates w[ith] Alliance. Maintain 301.
2) Review of FTA/NAFTA – blue ribbon commission with D[avid] O[rchard] w[ith] choice of chair w[ith] P[eter] M[acKay’s] agreement. Rest of members to be jointly agreed upon.
3) Clean up of head office including change of national director in consultation (timing w[ithin] reasonable period in future, pre-election) and some of DO’s people working at head office.
4) Commitment to making environmental protection front and center incl[uding] sustainable agriculture, forestry, reducing pollution through rail.
[Signed by Peter MacKay and David Orchard]

Looks pretty straightforward.
No merger. Fix our party instead.

4. ON Court Challenge By Orchard, Others

Administrative law — Voluntary association — Political parties — Political parties registered under Canada Elections Act — Leaders of Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance reaching agreement for merger of political parties — Common law principles regarding unregulated voluntary associations did not apply to political parties registered under Canada Elections Act — Canada Elections Act governing merger of registered political parties — Canada Elections Act, S.C. 2000, c. 9.

On October 15, 2003, Peter MacKay, leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada (“PC Party”), reached an agreement in principle with Steven [page278] Harper, leader of the Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance (“Alliance”), for the establishment of the “Conservative Party of Canada”. PC Party members who were opposed to the agreement applied to the court for several declarations. The premise of these declarations was that the PC Party could not be dissolved or merged with another political party except with the unanimous consent of all its members. The applicants also sought a permanent injunction to prevent anyone from dealing with the party’s assets.

[4] The applicants are PC Party members who are opposed to the merger of the party with the Alliance. They request that the court make a number of declarations, which are all premised on their view that the PC Party cannot be dissolved or merged with another political party, except with the unanimous consent of all of its members. They also seek a permanent injunction to prevent anyone from otherwise dealing with the party’s assets.

[5] I note that several items of the relief set out in the Notice of Application are not pursued before me. Paragraph 1(j) requested a declaration that Mr. MacKay is in breach of his written agreement, dated June 1, 2003, with Mr. Orchard, and sought consequential relief. The request for this relief was withdrawn on the consent of counsel prior to the date set for the hearing. Paragraph 1(e) sought a declaration that the procedures set by the Management Committee of the PC Party for the special meeting scheduled for December 6, 2003 are contrary to the Party’s Constitution and by-laws. Counsel for the applicants indicated they [page280] were not seeking such relief and informed the court the applicants were making no attack on the specific procedures adopted by the Party respecting the special meeting. Counsel also informed the court that the applicants were not requesting the court to deal with the relief sought in para. 1(g) which sought a declaration that the Constitution of the PC Party prohibited its leader from agreeing with the leader of another political party that the PC Party will not nominate candidates in every federal constituency in Canada.

[6] Traditionally, the courts have been reluctant to get involved in supervising the internal affairs of voluntary associations. However, courts do recognize that membership in a voluntary association can give individuals important social rights that are worthy of some protection. Members may request the courts to require that the organization carry out its affairs honestly, in good faith and in accordance with its governing rules.

[7] In this case we are dealing with a political party. The social interest of members in ensuring that the organization’s affairs are conducted in accordance with its governing Constitution is apparent. Citizens exercise important rights in participating in political activity through membership in political parties. However, the court must be careful not to intrude into the political realm. There were submissions and evidence in this case that I considered to be political rhetoric. I have disregarded all such evidence and submissions.

[13] I am satisfied that the situation is sufficiently developed to give rise to an actual dispute between the parties. Both sides have important interests at stake. The leadership of the PC Party has embarked on a path to merge the party. The applicants are opposed to the course of action being taken. Counsel for both sides indicated to the court that it would be of assistance to have a decision before the vote is taken tomorrow. Given their national significance, there is good reason to determine the questions raised by this actual dispute, and I am satisfied that the court’s decision will be of practical effect in resolving the dispute.

[14] I have concluded that this dispute does not fall within the ambit of the internal dispute resolution in Article 13 of the PC Party’s Constitution. I regard the internal process as intended to deal with questions about whether the ongoing affairs of the party are being conducted in compliance with its Constitution and by-laws. This dispute arises in extraordinary circumstances not contemplated by its Constitution, concerns its continued existence, and as will be seen, is in large measure about the proper interpretation and effect of a public statute. In deciding not to defer to the internal arbitration process, I paid no heed to the applicants’ arguments that that process was flawed by relationship and institutional bias. I regard the applicant’s apprehension of bias to be without merit.

[40] In expressing this view, I should not be taken to be declaring the law. In this proceeding I was asked to make declarations that the PC Party cannot merge, transfer its assets, or dissolve without the unanimous consent of every one of its individual members. I have decided, based on the view I take of the law, that it is not appropriate to make such declarations.

[41] A further comment must be made about para. 1(h) of the application. Paragraph 1(h) seeks “a declaration that the resolution [before the December 6 special meeting] does not constitute the resolution required pursuant to s. 400(2)(b) of the Canada Elections Act in order for the PC Party to merge with another registered party under the Act”. Whether the resolution being acted upon tomorrow, or any other resolution, satisfies the requirements of the Act must, in the first instance, be decided by the Chief Electoral Officer. I refuse the relief requested in para. 1(h) on that basis.

[42] The application is dismissed in its entirety. Counsel may make an appointment through my secretary to address costs.
Application dismissed.

In short the Court ruled that the matter should be decided internally. The parties have governing documents (such as constitutions) which set out terms for various issues, including mergers.

One way to look at this would be the “sort out your own business” line of reasoning prevailed. And while members of an organization should expect leaders to behave in a good faith manner, the Court apparently isn’t always the place to demand such a resolution.

While the Judge “could” have intervened, the decision was made not to.

See the next section for the Elections Act (400-403)

5. Canada Elections Act

[34] I set out the provisions in full, underlining the particular phrases that I find helpful in interpreting the provisions. I discuss some of the particular phrases below.

400(1) Two or more registered parties may, at any time other than during the period beginning 30 days before the issue of a writ for an election and ending on polling day, apply to the Chief Electoral Officer to become a single registered party resulting from their merger.
(2) An application to merge two or more registered parties must
(a) be certified by the leaders of the merging parties;
(b) be accompanied by a resolution from each of the merging parties approving the proposed merger; and
(c) contain the information required from a party to be registered, except for the information referred to in paragraph 366(2)(i).

401(1) The Chief Electoral Officer shall amend the registry of parties by replacing the names of the merging parties with the name of the merged party if
(a) the application for the merger was not made in the period referred to in subsection 400(1); and
(b) the Chief Electoral Officer is satisfied that
(i) the merged party is eligible for registration as a political party under this Act, and
(ii) the merging parties have discharged their obligations under this Act, including their obligations to report on their financial transactions and their election expenses and to maintain valid and up-to-date information concerning their registration.
(2) The Chief Electoral Officer shall notify the officers of the merging parties in writing whether the registry of parties is to be amended under subsection (1).
(3) If the Chief Electoral Officer amends the registry of parties, he or she shall cause to be published in the Canada Gazette a notice that the names of the merging parties have been replaced in the registry with the name of the merged party.

402(1) A merger of registered parties takes effect on the day on which the Chief Electoral Officer amends the registry of parties under subsection 401(1).
(2) On the merger of two or more registered parties,
(a) the merged party is the successor of each merging party;
(b) the merged party becomes a registered party;
(c) the assets of each merging party belong to the merged party;
(d) the merged party is responsible for the liabilities of each merging party; [page287]
(e) the merged party is responsible for the obligations of each merging party to report on its financial transactions and election expenses for any period before the merger took effect;
(f) the merged party replaces a merging party in any proceedings, whether civil, penal or administrative, by or against the merging party; and
(g) any decision of a judicial or quasi-judicial nature involving a merging party may be enforced by or against the merged party.

403. Within six months after a merger
(a) each of the merging parties shall provide the Chief Electoral Officer with the documents referred to in subsection 424(1) for
(i) the portion of its current fiscal period that ends on the day before the day on which the merger takes effect, and
(ii) any earlier fiscal period for which those documents have not been provided; and
(b) the merged party shall provide the Chief Electoral Officer with
(i) a statement, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, of its assets and liabilities, including any surplus or deficit, at the date of the merger,
(ii) an auditor’s report, submitted to the chief agent of the merged party, as to whether the statement presents fairly and in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles the information on which it was based, and
(iii) a declaration in the prescribed form by the chief agent of the merged party concerning the statement.

These sections of the Canada Elections Act are cited in both the Provincial and Federal Court rulings. As such, we should know what they actually say. In short, they quite clearly allow for party mergers. Broken promises and backroom deals don’t actually appear anywhere in the text.

6. ON Court Of Appeal (Orchard et al.)

[17] As a preliminary matter, the respondent moves to quash the appeal as now being moot. It argues that there is no longer a live issue affecting the rights of the parties because the merger has happened and the Conservative Party has been registered by the Chief Electoral Officer in place of the PC Party and the Alliance Party.

[18] In my view, the motion must be dismissed. There remains the same real legal issue between the parties that existed before December 6, 2003, namely, whether the PC Party can be dissolved or merged with another political party without the unanimous consent of all of its members. The only difference is that if [page134] they are successful, the appellants must now seek a remedial order undoing what has happened rather than an order to prevent it from occurring. The respondent has not shown that this would be impossible. The underlying legal issues still have an effect on the rights of the parties and hence mootness does not apply.

[19] On the appeal itself, the appellants’ fundamental contention is that the common law requires the PC Party to obtain the unanimous consent of all of its members to merge with the Alliance Party. In making this argument they place significant reliance on Astgen.

[45] By the terms of the constitution this decision is final and binding. Having had the opportunity to participate in that process the appellants are bound to accept it as final and binding, subject to judicial review which they have not sought. This is a corollary to the obligation of an organization like a trade union to give notice of an arbitration to a member whose rights will be affected because the decision of the arbitration board is final and binding. See, for example, Hoogendoorn v. Greening Metal Products and Screening Equipment Co. (1967), 1967 CanLII 20 (SCC), [1968] S.C.R. 30, 65 D.L.R. (2d) 641. It is not open to the appellants to seek a determination by the court that the resolution is of no legal effect because the PC Party failed to comply with the procedures required by its constitution. In this circumstance, that is a matter for the Arbitration Committee.

[46] In summary, therefore, the appellants’ arguments on appeal must be rejected.

[47] The respondent has cross-appealed from the decision of the application judge to award no costs because of the public importance of the issues raised. We did not call on the appellants to respond to the cross-appeal. In our view, it was an entirely appropriate exercise of discretion by the judge of first instance.

[48] As to the costs of the proceedings in this court, success has been divided. The appellants failed on the appeal. The respondent failed to establish mootness and failed on the cross-appeal. Together with the public importance of the questions raised, this makes it appropriate to order that there be no costs in this court. [page141]

[49] I would therefore dismiss the motion to quash and the appeal and the cross-appeal. No costs in this court.

Among other things, the Court of Appeals states that relief should have come in the form of an application for judicial review challenging the Elections Commission.

Beyond that, the Appeals Panel sidesteps the underhanded nature of MacKay’s duplicity. Instead, they point out that the Canada Elections Act explicitly allows for mergers except in very limited cases. Unanimity from all participants is not required.

To sum up, there is nothing new to add here, so appeal dismissed.

7. Stevens v. CPC (Federal Court)


This was not the only case that was launched. There was an Application for Judicial Review started in Federal Court to contest the ruling that allowed the merger.

[76] The Applicant argued that the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed the opinion of the application judge that section 401(1)(b)(ii) of the Act vests the CEO not the Court, with the mandate of determining if the merger application met the statutory requirements. However, he also submits that the Court of Appeal recognized that section 400(2)(b) of the Act implicitly requires that a merger resolution be passed in accordance with the constitution of a merging party.

[77] Accordingly, the Applicant argues that this holding supports his contention that the CEO erred in law by rejecting the constitution of the PC Party as being relevant to his decision. The Applicant repeats and relies upon his earlier submissions that the constitution of that party specifically prohibits the merger application that was made.

[78] Further, the Applicant says that the judgment of the Ontario Court of Appeal does not address the argument that the common law rights of voluntary associations include the right to be heard when such association is a political party that is at risk of dissolution.

ii) The Respondent

[79] The Respondent disagrees with the Applicant’s interpretation of the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision and argues that the Court rejected the arguments that the merger of the PC Party and the Alliance Party attracted application of the common law rule that the unanimous consent of each party member was required for the merger of those parties. Further, the Respondent submits that the Ontario Court of Appeal held that the Act did not require unanimous consent for such merger.

[80] In conclusion, the Respondent relies on the decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal as supporting its view that the decision of the CEO to amend the registry of parties on December 7, 2003, was correct.

<

p style=”padding: 2px 6px 4px 6px; color: #555555; background-color: #eeeeee; border: #dddddd 2px solid;”>

[114] A waiting period of sixty days applies when a political party initially applies for registration. In my view, it is reasonable that a waiting period, albeit a reduced one, will also apply when two registered parties apply for merger.

[115] It follows, then, that in my opinion, the CEO erred by amending the registry of parties on the same day that the merger application was made and without waiting for thirty days, to ensure that no election writ would be issued, thereby activating the commencement of the prohibited period.

[116] As noted earlier, the Applicant seeks an order quashing the decision of the CEO and reinstating the PC Party on the registry of parties. Alternatively, the Applicant seeks an order setting aside the decision of December 7, 2003 and referring the matter back to the CEO.

[117] In my opinion, the remedies sought by the Applicant should not be granted. Pursuant to section 18.1(3) of the Federal Courts Act, supra, the Court has discretion in the matter of granting relief upon an application for judicial review. On occasion, relief has been denied and in this regard, I refer to Mobil Oil Canada Ltd. v. Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board, 1994 CanLII 114 (SCC), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 202.

[118] In the present case, I take judicial notice of the fact that no writ for an election was issued in the thirty days following December 7, 2003. In the result, the CEO’s action in immediately amending the registry of parties, although contrary to my interpretation of the Act, had no material effect. In the exercise of my discretion, I decline to grant the relief sought.

[119] The application for judicial review is dismissed. However, the Applicant has raised a valid point and is entitled to his assessed costs under Column III.

                                         <center>  ORDER</center>

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
.
The application for judicial review is dismissed, the Applicant to have his assessed costs under Column III

Much the same as with the Ontario Courts. The Court declines to intervene, and rules the merger allowed under the Canada Elections Act.

8. Stevens v. CPC (Federal Court of Appeal)

[49]I therefore find that the only interpretation that would give a concrete meaning to the texts in question is the one that requires the Chief Electoral Officer to let 30 days expire once the merger application is received before accepting it. If this was not Parliament’s intention, it is free to correct our vision with a more specific legislative text.

Exercising discretionary power for judicial review
[50]Justice Heneghan refused to grant the relief sought despite the fact that the Chief Electoral Officer, by not waiting 30 days before making his decision, violated the Canada Elections Act. Taking judicial notice of the fact that no writ ordering an election was issued in the 30 days following the merger application, she found, at paragraph 118 of her reasons:
In the result, the CEO’s action in immediately amending the registry of parties, although contrary to my interpretation of the Act, had no material effect. In the exercise of my discretion, I decline to grant the relief sought.

[51]Justice Heneghan, in my opinion, judiciously exercised the discretion inherent to the power for judicial review. The existence of this discretion is based both on the text of subsection 18.1(3) [as enacted by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 5; 2002, c. 8, s. 27] of the Federal Courts Act [R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7 , s. 1 (as am. by S.C. 2002, c. 8, s. 14)] under which the “Federal Court may” [emphasis added] quash the decision of a federal board, commission or tribunal, and on the principles associated with traditional prerogative writs. In this regard, it would be appropriate to return to this long excerpt from Justice Hugessen’s reasons in Schaaf v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, 1984 CanLII 3622 (FCA), [1984] 2 F.C. 334 (C.A.), at pages 342-344, which summarize the basis of this discretion best, with the adaptations required by the new, more explicit formulation of section 18 [as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 4; 2002, c. 8, s. 26]:

In my view, nothing in the words used makes them other than attributive of jurisdiction. They create the power in the Court to set aside decisions which offend in one of the stated ways but do not impose a duty to do so in every case.

More of the same. The Federal Court can use discretion and choose not to intervene.

9. Current CPC Leadership Antics

This is the follow-up to Section #2. Andrew Scheer becomes leader of the Conservative Party of Canada in May 2017, is a surprise (and contested) 13th ballot over Maxime Bernier. However, it soon becomes clear that many people did not want this, and Scheer is undermined within his own party.

Bernier leaves in August 2018 to start his own party, the bizarrely named “People’s Party of Canada”. He claims that the CPC is no longer conservative, and that he will form an alternative. He also starts adopting populist rhetoric, something he previously hadn’t shown. Interestingly, Bernier spends more time attacking Scheer than the Liberal Party, which is currently in government.

Curiously, the People’s Party is missing a lot:
(a) Bernier has never called a leadership campaign
(b) No policies have ever been voted on
(c) There is no party constitution
(d) There are no by-laws, or other governing documents
(e) There is no national council, or senior board
(f) The platform was recycled from Bernier’s 2016/17 leadership run

Critics claim it is a “temporary” party meant to keep the Conservatives from winning, and to get Scheer ejected. Strangely enough, Peter MacKay’s name gets floated as a possible successor should Scheer not become Prime Minister.

Ultimately, Justin Trudeau did win again, but this time a minority. Despite winning the popular vote and increasing the seat total, Scheer was pressured to resign from the CPC leadership.

Could MacKay be at it again? Is this another scheme to undermine the will of conservative party members and select the party’s leader? Was the PPC just a psy-op to get rid of Scheer and install another leader instead?

10. Politics Is Rotten To The Core


This current fiasco has relevance to the 2003 one for a simple reason: some of the same people are involved in both. Now, could Peter MacKay be up to his old tricks of deceit and backstabbing? Choosing who becomes leader?

Actually governing people always seems to take a backseat to the infighting, pettiness, and selfishness of the politicians involved. Public servants appear to be anything but.

Giving your word, even in writing, seems to mean little. Alliances will always give way to self interest.

Posted on

Guest Post: CdnSpotlight Researching Corruption Within Canada’s Ranks

Another researcher getting into the muck and filth that is the Canadian Government and administration. Here is some of the work unearthed and exposed. Worth a good long read, for anyone who is truly concerned about the future of the nation. Here are just a few of the postings. Go check out more.

CLICK HERE, for the Gab account where this research can be found.

1. Dominic Barton

CANADA’S DEEP STATE
What began with a negative news article about Dominic Barton becoming our new ambassador to China in Sept. got me curious so I started digging.

And what I’ve been finding is alarming.
It is much, much larger than just lowly ol’ Barton as the pic shows.
The tentacles are far-reaching and the Canadian players involved are so intertwined that it’ll cause some ‘splodey heads like mine.
So please bear with me as I try to explain this in my series/threads.

So let me start with the article that started it all:
Terence Corcoran: Dominic Barton could be the right man for China … if he remembers what makes Canada work:
Barton’s admiration and support of China’s statist economic ideas, and his frequently stated disdain for market capitalism, certainly give one reason to pause – Sept. 2019

CLICK HERE for an article on the subject.

Read every word of that article, it briefly describes Barton’s “philosophy” & ideology

“China as the world’s leading practitioner of state corporatism. Barton thinks the Communist Party of China has developed some fantastic economic models that might even be exportable to the rest of the world, including Canada.

Barton and McKinsey, for example, have been enthusiastic backers of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), a massive global infrastructure scheme

the One Belt, One Road (OBOR) infrastructure initiative, the project was described by Barton in 2015 as “inspiring” and a model for “long-term thinking” with infrastructure spending as the foundation for economic growth.

China’s Belt/Road model, suggests Barton, is the way of the future. “The Chinese saying ‘build a road first if you want to get rich’ is spot on — data suggests that for every $1 billion in infrastructure investment, 30,000 to 80,000 jobs are created, generating $2.5 billion in new GDP.”

In my humble opinion, this is where Canada’s headed…

2. CPPIB, Blackrock, Mark Wiseman

CANADA’S DEEP STATE Part 2
Now that ambassador Dominic Barton has been identified as the architect, let’s look at some of his buddies and their connections with BlackRock and Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB)

Born in Niagara Falls Ontario, Mark Wiseman became a Senior Managing Director at BlackRock NYC in 2016 as Global Head of Active Equities for BlackRock and Chairman of BlackRock Alternative Investors. He also serves as Chairman of the firm’s Global Investment Committee and on its Global Executive Committee.

He was President and CEO of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board (CPPIB) 2012-2016 after starting there in 2005 as Senior Vice-President, Private Investments.

Prior to joining CPPIB, Mark was responsible for the private equity fund and co-investment program at the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan. He has worked at Harrowston Inc., a publicly traded Canadian merchant bank, and as a lawyer with Sullivan & Cromwell, where he practiced in New York and Paris.

He also served as a law clerk to Madam Justice Beverley McLachlin at the Supreme Court of Canada – ring a bell? During the Justice Committee hearings with Jody Wilson-Raybould about the SNC-Lavalin Scandal, Buttsputin & Clerk of the Privy Council had insisted Jody talk with her for “advice”.

But the BlackRock ties don’t stop there.

BlackRock Canada CEO is Marcia Moffat since 2015– who just happens to be Mark Wiseman’s wife – based in Toronto. Mark returns home to Toronto on weekends from New York. She was formerly with RBC under Janice Fukakusa (see pic)

Wiseman is also the Chairman of FCLTGlobal (formerly Focusing Capital on the Long Term), an organization that encourages longer-term approaches in business and investing, which was set up by BlackRock, CPPIB, Dow, McKinsey & Company and Tata in 2016.

Mark is also a member of the Advisory Council on Economic Growth, which advises Finance Minister MORNEAU on economic policies to achieve long-term, sustainable growth. Mark serves on the boards of several non-profit organizations, including Sinai Health Services in Toronto, the Capital Markets Institute and the Dean’s Advisory Board at the Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.

At CPPIB, Wiseman made a name for himself by opening offices and pursuing investments abroad, particularly in South America and South Asia.

CPP investment chief Mark Wiseman to make surprise exit after nearly four years at helm.

While the one source characterized his departure as amicable, another source familiar with CPPIB’s inner workings said there was friction on leadership issues.

“…some questioned whether it was only the CPP’s interests that were being promoted” His years as CEO at CPPIB have been marked by a stream of deals, ranging from a lucrative early investment in Chinese e-commerce company Alibaba.

In 2015 – Why the head of Canada’s biggest pension fund is bullish on energy.

Mark Wiseman says CPPIB is looking at a range of investments from buying equity and partnering on acquisitions to outright takeovers
Mark Wiseman, who runs Canada’s biggest pension fund, offered the Davos crowd last week a two-pronged argument on why he’s bullish on energy assets after the recent plunge in oil prices.

Wiseman said that simple supply and demand perspective all but guarantees oil prices will be higher 10 years down the road, offering investment opportunities now for the $234 billion fund. “I’ll take that bet” on oil’s rebound, he said in an interview Tuesday at Bloomberg’s Toronto office.

“We see a lot of value in the Western Canadian basin,” he said, noting that oil sands projects are on his radar.
“WE LIKE COMPANIES THAT HAVE GOOD UNDERLYING ASSETS AND BAD BALANCE SHEETS. That’s the perfect scenario for us.”
–> premonition?

He encouraged the Canadian federal and provincial governments to look to jurisdictions like Australia, where state governments are given incentives to invest in infrastructure and court outside funding.

In the meantime, Canada Pension is looking to places like China, India and Brazil.

3. Willy Porneau’s Advisory Council

Let’s take a look at how quickly the Liberals put Deep State into play.

Willy Porno (Morneau) and his new Dream Team – the Advisory Council on Economic Growth.

Less than 2 months after the 2015 federal election, Willy Porno announces the new Advisory Council in his speech to the Toronto Region Board of Trade.

This was obviously planned long before the election.

CPAC December 14, 2015 – Bill Morneau – Keynote Speech
Finance Minister Bill Morneau addresses the Toronto Region Board of Trade, discussing the government’s strategy for supporting the middle class and long-term economic growth in Canada, including a plan to create an advisory council for economic growth. Following his speech, Morneau responds to questions from the board.

You should see this, and also see this.

A month later, the Crime Minister is at the World Economic Forum in Davos, with Dominic Barton:
“I would bet that almost all of you have Canadians in leadership positions in your companies—you may not know it because we don’t often shout it from the rooftops, some clichés about Canadians are true. In fact, at least half of you have hired Dominic Barton at one point or another.”

While in Davos, PMJT met with many high rollers – Microsoft CEO Natya Nadella, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg,

and billionaire George Soros, whose interests include combating climate change.

Then on Feb.22, 2016 Willy Porno announced Barton as Chair of the Council:
This article references the earlier ties Barton had to Wiseman by creating Focusing Capital on the Long Term (FCLT) Global in 2013 – board of directors include Larry Fink CEO BlackRock NYC – Wiseman’s future boss in 3 short years.
McKinsey executive to head new federal economic council.

4. Canada Infrastructure Bank

Canada’s Deep State Part 4 – Canada Infrastructure Bank
The Canada infrastructure Bank (CIB) has been steeped in controversy since it was first proposed.

The Liberal’s 2015 election promise was to provide low-cost financing to municipalities for infrastructure projects, as a vehicle for Ottawa to use its strong credit rating and lending authority to help municipalities reduce their cost of borrowing.

The Liberal plans evolved considerably since the party first promised an infrastructure bank during that election campaign – there was no mention of attracting private capital. The role of the proposed Canadian Infrastructure Development Bank was to attract financing from institutional investors to fund projects over the next 10 years as a Crown corporation.

Dominic Barton and Michael Sabia sketched out the infrastructure bank idea at the Public Policy Forum summit in Oct. 2016, a more ambitious plan in which the bank would gather and prioritize large projects that could earn revenue, such as electrical networks, and that attract billions in added international investment.

Sounds an awful lot like McKinsey’s “for-profit public-sector work” and advising governments.

The proposal to entice global pension funds into major Canadian investments goes far beyond anything promised to date by the federal Liberals, but Finance Minister Bill Morneau – who worked directly with the panel over the past several months – signalled a strong openness to the recommendations announced Thursday.

However, the panel’s 14 members include leaders of some of those institutional investors, including Mark Wiseman, senior managing director of BlackRock Inc., and Michael Sabia, CEO of the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec pension fund.

Examples of potential projects listed… include toll highways and bridges, high-speed rail, port and airport expansions, city infrastructure, national broadband infrastructure, power transmission and natural resource infrastructure.

PM hopes to attract billions in private capital for infrastructure
Trudeau takes his foreign-investment agenda to investors, two weeks after announcing an infrastructure bank.

He will be accompanied by nine members of cabinet, including Finance Minister Bill Morneau, Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi, Transport Minister Marc Garneau, and Health Minister Jane Philpott. Trudeau and four of the ministers also are set to make their pitch to about a dozen Canadian investors — insurance companies and big pension funds like the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board — in the morning before meeting with the international investors in the afternoon.

Attracting billions in private-sector capital for “transformative” infrastructure projects is key to the Liberal government’s long-term strategy to boost Canada’s sluggish economic growth.

5. Century Initiative

Canada’s Deep State – Part 5 Century Initiative

When I first started digging about Canada’s new ambassador to China Dominic Barton, he popped up in a group called Century Initiative – a “non-profit” Canadian “registered charity”

Century Initiative’s 6 Founding Members – Dom, his buddy Mark & some new players
Dominic Barton, new Ambassador to China, prev. Global Managing Partner McKinsey & Co
Mark D. Wiseman, BlackRock NYC, former CEO Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
Goldy Hyder, Business Council of Canada president and CEO
– Future post to come on Hyder
Willa Black, Vice-President, Corporate Affairs – Cisco Canada
Tom Milroy, Managing Director, Generation Capital Limited
Andrew Pickersgill, also McKinsey & Co

Registered in Jan.2016, a few short months after the 2015 election, a month after Willy Porno announces the Canada Infrastructure Bank at the Toronto Region Board of Trade and while Dom & PMJT are schmoozing at the World Economic Forum in Davos.

Now what would 6 capitalists be doing with a charity? Is this Barton’s belief that “corporations should be vehicles for social responsibility, not profits, and they should act for the welfare of all stakeholders, not just shareholders”?

This charitable status is a huge concern – if I’m not mistaken, there is no reporting or accountability of charities – no records of donors. A perfect vehicle for money-laundering & off-shore investments, likely thru the CIB, and tax write-offs for donors – the prefect storm for the elite 1%. I also believe the recent changes to charities in Bill C-86 was an “indirect” benefit to them.

Seems odd that Dom would set up a charity because in the past decade, McKinsey made a major push into FOR-PROFIT PUBLIC-SECTOR WORK, advising governments around the world.

Possible links to 21st Century Initiative by the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) & Obama??? Anons???

From Jan. to Sept. 2016, there doesn’t appear to be much about Century Initiative in the news. Of course Dom & Wiseman are busy with the Canada Investment Bank. But their buddies at Century Initiative were busy busy setting up, writing reports & hiring Shari Austin as CEO, previously VP of Corporate Citizenship and Executive Director of the RBC Foundation – not sure of her connection with Gordon Nixon, Janice Fukakusa or Wiseman’s wife Marcia Moffat at RBC but you can bet there is one.

In Oct. 2016, press releases & new articles start exploding on the scene

Hidden behind the Canada Infrastructure Bank’s “mandate” is Century Initiative, a “registered charity”
Finance Minister’s key advisers want 100M Canadians by 2100

Barton sees a dovetail between some of the ideas behind the Century Initiative and the growth council (Advisory Council), but he says they are separate.

In fact, behind the closed doors of the growth council meetings, Barton said the Century Initiative’s 100-million goal didn’t come up.

He did acknowledge that he and Wiseman were among the biggest proponents behind the immigration-boosting idea that the group presented to Morneau.

“Probably because Mark and I have been in (Century Initiative) we’re obviously more naturally bullish towards it,” said Barton, who also noted that there was a lot of debate on the scope of the immigration proposal.

6. Go Follow CdnSpotlight

The above is only a small sample of what has been posted on the Gab account by CdnSpotlight. Lots of dirt, and much of it very unpleasant. However, Canadians concerned about their country should take a look into this.

The rot and corruption runs deep throughout the Canadian political systems. Unfortunately, most people just don’t want to know about it.

Posted on

Guest Post: Civilian Intelligence Network’s Report On Canada Infrastructure Bank

1. Civilian Intelligence Network Posting


This is a pair of reposts from Civilian Intelligence Network, and authored by Shawn Melville. The topic is the Canada Infrastructure Bank, and its dirty secrets they don’t want you knowing. It’s some of the best research available in Canada on what goes on in Ottawa and Quebec.

In a time when mainstream media is literally bought off (thanks to a $595M “subsidy” from the Feds), it’s nice to see that some people are willing to put in the long hours to get the dirt on what is really happening. So kudos to this group for exposing the rot within and surrounding the Canada Infrastructure Bank.

Go check out Civilian Intelligence Network, and take the plunge into the underworld of corruption and rot within Canadian politics. Here are the first article, and the second one.

2. Text Of First Article

BlackRock, SNC & The Infrastructure Bank: Meet the Global Construction Cartel

When the Canadian government entered into an agreement with BlackRock in 2017, what occurred was a partnership with the Canada Infrastructure Bank (CIB). In doing so, Canada became affiliated with the world construction cartel. Key players in SNC Lavalin, the newly-minted CIB, and the Privy Council are developers of the social economy, a complex scheme to fleece Canada.

Considering the key players involved, some of the CIB funding is likely going to support infrastructure overseas to back the construction cartel (26). This is a funding resource for SNC because they have been barred from bidding on World Bank projects. The CIB is wealth transfer diverting Canadian tax dollars and pension funds to third-world countries to build their infrastructure, create jobs, and stimulate their economy. Let’s have a look at the current CIB board members. We will see how they overlap through government, business, and foundations.

Bruno Guilmette served as interim Chief Investment Officer of Canada Infrastructure Bank, where he established the organization’s initial investment policies and processes (1). Previously, he served on the Executive Committee and Board of the Global Infrastructure Investor Association (GIIA). The GIIA plans and delivers a program of global advocacy and stakeholder engagement that promotes global private investment in infrastructure(2)(3). Rapid income growth across developing countries, as well as rapid urbanization, is driving enormous demand for infrastructure investment that is vital to their country’s future economic growth. However, many of these emerging economies are stuck on the same question: how do we pay for this?

Worldwide investment in infrastructure needs to average $3.3 trillion a year to support global economic growth aspirations and provide citizens with essential services

Government budgets are being strained by public debt, but according to most estimates there is more than $1 trillion in private sector capital available from millions of individual citizens in the form of pension funds (4). Institutional investors and bank assets could also “partially support infrastructure projects”, with 87% of these funds originating from advanced economies (2). As is described in this article written by the GIIA, Canada’s Infrastructure Bank is setting up the guidelines for the procurement of money for these global infrastructure programs (4):

Two countries that are succeeding in unlocking this dry powder (pension funds) are Australia and Canada. They have invested in a specialist central resource (Infrastructure Bank) to gather and share best practices for procuring bodies, thereby building a capability to identify the pipeline of infrastructure requirements and the tool kit of financial models to procure them.

Therefore, Trudeau’s Infrastructure Bank, promoted by the Liberals as a tool for developing infrastructure projects within Canada, was an out-right lie to Canadians. Infrastructure development, jobs, and the economic growth that comes with it was never intended to service the needs of Canadians, but rather to benefit global construction companies and citizens of third-world economies! Companies such as SNC-Lavalin were the only ones awarded contracts and half of these contracts were funding for work outside Canada (5).

Who better to help implement this “Global Infrastructure Bank” than Bruno Guilmette(6)? Guilmette not only served on the Global Infrastructure and Investment Association (GIIA) board, but also as the Senior Vice-President of Infrastructure at PSP Investments, Canada’s largest pension investment managers (7). Mr. Guilmette also served as the Senior Director of Investments & Infrastructure at the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (6), the Quebec Pension Plan that is the largest shareholder of SNC-Lavalin (8). Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec even procured a contract with Canada Infrastructure Bank to build a rail system in Montreal, and SNC-Lavalin received the funding (9)(10)(11):

And it’s true that SNC-Lavalin’s largest shareholder is the Quebec public-service pension fund, whose pet project is a light-rail network, whose main construction contractor is SNC-Lavalin. And it’s true that the head of the pension fund pushed hard for the federal government to set up an Infrastructure Bank whose only investment to date… was in the light-rail network promoted by the pension fund that is SNC’s biggest investor and which, in turn, is the rail project’s biggest contractor.

Bruno Guilmette also has other ties to SNC-Lavalin and they include:

Bruno Guilmette is director of Boralex Inc. (6)(14). Alain Rheaume, who is on the board of directors of SNC-Lavalin, is also board of directors for Boralex Inc. (15).

Bruno Guilmette is on the board of Avi Alliance (6), which is a subsidiary of Hochtief (an international construction services provider). Hochtief has partnered with SNC-Lavalin on infrastructure contracts (16).

Billions of dollars of Canadian taxpayer money is being poured into SNC-Lavalin (5). The World Bank has also listed SNC-Lavalin as an ineligible firm to receive funding for contracts due to allegations of fraud and corruption (27). This being the case, was the Infrastructure Bank set up to fund the corrupt construction cartels? A bigger question is, how much of the $35 billion of the $186 billion in contracts already pledged has SNC have been signed with the Infrastructure Bank? Another issue concerning SNC, is that taxpayers may be on liable if “forecasts prove inaccurate, projects fail, or costs otherwise accrue above and beyond what was expected (25).”

Blackrock, a US-based asset management company overseeing $5.1 trillion in investments (17), reported on February 8, 2018 that it was raising $10 billion in private equity funds and that it would seek a private commitment from sovereign wealth funds (e.g. pension funds) and other institutional investors, to set up a fund called “BlackRock Alternative Investments” (18)(19). Heading up this project was Andre Bourbonnais, who was Senior Managing Director of the CPP Investment Board and Global Head of Investment Partnerships (2010-2015). Before that, he worked for Caisse de Depot et Placement du Quebec (2004-2010)(20). The current president of Canada Infrastructure Bank, Pierre Lavallee, worked for Andre Bourbonais in 2012 at CPP Investment Board as VP for Investment Partnerships (12).

What exactly is the “BlackRock Alternative Investments” fund? Social economy is often referred to as the “alternative economy”, a global movement powered by corporations and their foundations to promote communism (21). This raises several questions: Is Canada’s Infrastructure Bank managed by BlackRock? Does BlackRock have controlling interest in this bank? And will this bank be used to fund the social economy (17)? The connections between these pension boards, corporations, and the president and directors of the Canada Infrastructure Bank warrant public scrutiny.

New evidence reveals that BlackRock’s role in the Canada Infrastructure Bank may have also included advising on key personnel including Pierre Lavallee, the current president of Canada Infrastructure Bank (22). Trudeau consulted BlackRock extensively for the $35 billion investment in the new bank which critics say will put the interests of investors ahead of Canadian Taxpayers (23). After all, BlackRock’s fiduciary responsibility is to its clients and not Canadian taxpayers, pension investors, or consumers. Moreover, the Paradise Papers include 9 companies connected to the BlackRock Group. These are tax havens that contribute to income inequality, benefiting wealthy corporations at the expense of taxpayers (17).

This year’s election should definitely not focus on the dairy cartel and supply management, for that is but a smoke screen when compared to the billions of dollars at stake in the hands of the construction cartel and its influence on Canada Infrastructure Bank. It is a cartel which includes not only SNC-Lavalin, but many other corporations operating in Quebec, including those supporting members of the People’s Party of Canada. Out of 34 corporations that donated to Maxime Bernier, 21 were related to the construction industry. After all, the Beauce is a lot more than just dairy! One thing is certain, Canada is no longer a sovereign state but rather being run like a corporation, whereby the rights of citizens are being left at the wayside in favour of the globalist agenda. Canadians were never informed, never consulted, nor did we vote for this. We are indeed living under Canada Inc. (24).

3. Sources For First Article

  1. https://cib-bic.ca/en/board-of-directors/
  2. http://giia.net/infrastructure/
  3. http://giia.net/we-need-to-act-together-to-deliver-better-infrastructure/
  4. http://giia.net/author/tim-horan/
  5. https://www.thepostmillennial.com/feds-spend-4-2-billion-in-borrowed-money-since-snc-lavalin-scandal-broke/
  6. https://cib-bic.ca/en/board-of-directors/bruno-guilmette/
  7. https://www.investpsp.com/en/
  8. https://montrealgazette.com/business/snc-lavalin-has-made-remarkable-progress-caisse-ceo-says
  9. https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/canada-the-show/
  10. https://www.cdpq.com/en/news/pressreleases/canada-infrastructure-bank-invests-in-reseau-express-metropolitain-project-with
  11. http://www.snclavalin.com/en/reseau-express-metropolitain-rem-canada-engineering-procurement-construction
  12. https://www.linkedin.com/in/pierre-lavall%C3%A9e-473b0b4/?originalSubdomain=ca
  13. https://web.archive.org/web/20160326002325/www.cppib.com/en/what-we-do/investment-partnerships.html
  14. https://www.linkedin.com/in/bruno-guilmette-12270445/?originalSubdomain=ca
  15. http://www.snclavalin.com/en/about-us/board-directors/alain-rheaume.aspx
  16. https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/0416-city-lavalin
  17. https://nupge.ca/content/canada-infrastructure-bank-promoter-involved-tax-havens
  18. https://privatecapitaljournal.com/blackrock-raise-us-10b-long-term-private-equity-fund/
  19. https://privatecapitaljournal.com/blackrock-recruits-another-senior-cppib-executive/
  20. https://www.linkedin.com/in/andre-bourbonnais-3a063519/
  21. https://civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2019/02/18/soros-tides-foundation-and-the-ppc/
  22. https://blackrocktransparencyproject.org/2018/08/27/how-canadas-infrastructure-bank-was-created-by-and-set-up-to-benefit-blackrock/
  23. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/liberals-gave-investors-extraordinary-control-over-infrastructure-bank-opposition/article34910106/
  24. https://civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2019/03/01/johanne-mennie-deep-mysteries-deep-state/
  25. https://pressprogress.ca/why-the-liberal-governments-infrastructure-bank-is-helping-big-banks-and-dumping-user-fees-on-citizens/
  26. https://civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2019/03/03/soros-trudeau-snc-the-canada-investment-bank/
  27. https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/snc-lavalin-agrees-to-10-year-ban-from-world-bank-projects-1.1316719

4. Text Of Second Article


The Criminal Cartel of the Canada Infrastructure Bank Board

In this follow up to “BlackRock, SNC & The Infrastructure Bank: Meet the Global Construction Cartel” we continue with The Canada Infrastructure Bank Board and the who’s who of global communist policy makers. The same players transfer from boards of foundations to boards of corporations to ministers of government, not because they are good at what they do, but because they follow the rules of the multilateral (HYBRID) universe of international treaties. It is big business to sell out the tax payers and their sovereignty to the one world government.

Other Members of the Canada Infrastructure Board include (1):

James Cherry: James Cherry served on the Board of Governors and Board of Directors for the United Way Canada (2). Key executives from the president’s office of SNC-Lavalin were also involved with the United Way: Gilles Laramee was on the board (3), Jacques Lamarre was on the council of Governors (4), and Pierre Duhaime was on fundraising committee(4). James Cherry is also on the board for the Foundation of Greater Montreal (FGM)(7). The Foundation of Greater Montreal is a member of the Community Foundations of Canada (CFC), an organization that brings together 191 foundations that operate across Canada and the managed assets of which total over $5.8 billion (8). The FGM had a direct partnership with United Way and SNC-Lavalin (9). Several SNC-Lavalin executives have served on the FGM Board including: Michael Novak (10) and Jacques Bougie (current board member of SNC-Lavalin and mentor to the Trudeau Foundation)(11)(12)(13)(26) and a director of McCain Foods Ltd. (13). Canada’s Finance Minister Bill Morneau is married to McCain Foods heiress Nancy McCain (14). Morneau was instrumental in setting up the Infrastructure Bank.

Tim Brodhead was instrumental in planning the initial workings of the Infrastructure Bank along with Tides Canada Foundation (5). He has served on several boards with James Cherry: Board of Directors for the United Way (4), Board of Directors for FGM (7), and Board of Governors for Concordia University (21). Tim Brodhead is currently the President of the Pierre Elliot Trudeau Foundation and was also interim president of the Trudeau Foundation from 2013-2014 (6). It goes without saying that if Tides Foundation is involved so then is philanthropist George Soros (22)(23), who seems to have his hands in everyone’s cookie jar including our Canadian Infrastructure Bank.

Ms. Poonam Puri was a Trudeau Foundation post-doctoral fellow and award recipient (15). She is also a member of the International association of law schools (IALS) (16)(17). The International Association of Law Schools is a private, non-political, non-profit, collaborative, learned society dedicated to serving the worldwide legal education community. It consists of more than 170 law schools and departments from over 55 countries representing more than 7,500 law faculty members (18). It’s primary mission includes: To foster mutual understanding and respect for the worlds varied and changing legal systems and culture, to prepare lawyers for transnational global practice, to work with entities to develop guidelines and adapt legal education to the needs of changing society regarding international and transnational law (19). Many law schools participating in IALS programs receive funding from the Open Society Foundation (29). It has been proposed that IALS build a database of funding organizations that promote the Rule of Law such as intergovernmental organizations (the United Nations system, the European Union and the Council of Europe) to specific NGOs and foundations (such as the Carnegie Foundation, the Ford Foundation, the Open Society Foundation etc.) that could act to open up funding venues for its member(30).

Ms. Poonam Puri led a research project which investigated the reconfiguration of transnational governance: (20)

“A profound transformation in global regulation has resulted in a shift from a reliance on nation-state-driven treaty and law-making to a highly decentralized set of processes of norm-creation, that involve and are fueled by both public and private, governmental and non-governmental actors, operating in an emerging ‘post-national’ and ‘transnational’ space.”

“This directed research project is situated in this uniquely interdisciplinary and fast-developing field at the intersection of law, governance, finance and globalization…. the project, will focus on the Equator Principles (“EPs”)… to illuminate the reconfiguration of transnational governance.”

“The EPs constitute a voluntary common framework established in 2003, to which 67 global financial institutions have agreed for evaluating and managing social and environmental risk in privately-financed development projects.”

“The EP’s ambitious regulatory framework promises to incorporate corporate social responsibility, environmental responsibility, and human rights into the very core of the decision making process within the participating global banks, in some cases extending to all of a participating banks.”

Canadians must have missed this memo? Are the banks reconfiguring from a “transnational state” into an “international state” of governance”? For the many Canadians that still believe we are a “sovereign state”, just how exactly will these “Equator Principals” impact the regulatory framework of Canada’s Infrastructure Bank? After all Canadian pension funds are being used and it the Canadian taxpayers (not the international community) that will be on the hook for incurred losses?

Janice Fukakusa was Senior VP and chief internal auditor for RBC and chairman of RBC Ventures Fund (31) and now is on the Board of Directors for Canada Infrastructure Bank. Former SNC-Lavalin executives are also directors with Royal Bank Directors (24) and they include: Guy St. Pierre who was former CEO of SNC-Lavalin and mentor to the Trudeau Foundation (25), Jacques Bougie who is currently on the board of directors for SNC-Lavalin and McCain Foods and mentor on the Trudeau Foundation (24)(26)(27). In addition the president of McCain Foods, G. Wallace F. McCain is also director and on the audit committee for RBC (32).

Jane Bird was a senior Engineer from SNC-Lavalin and now sits on the Board of Directors of Canada Infrastructure Bank (28).

Kimberly Baird is a renowned First Nations Chief in BC and founder of Kim Baird Strategic Consulting (33). She helped to negotiate the Tsawwassen First Nations Treaty in BC, a modern urban land development treaty that would act to extinguish aboriginal title and rights to First Nations land whereby all land had to be registered and taxed (34). Chief Baird then helped to spearhead a major retail and commercial development project for two large shopping malls on First Nations land which was tied to a “social economy” community program (35)(36). She is described as a “wealthy retail land baron” by her Tsawwassen First Nations community(33), who fear that poverty and unemployment may drive them off their land. The partners in this land development project were Ivanhoe Cambridge and Property Development Group. Ivanhoe Cambridge is a subsidiary of Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec (CDPQ), the Quebec pension plan (37). Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec is the major stock holder of SNC-Lavalin (38).

Dave Bronconnier was Mayor of Calgary when SNC-Lavalin was awarded the 1 Billion dollar Calgary LRT contract from the city(39). His biography states that he is Director of Interloq Capital Inc. (1), but a thorough internet search for that company could not be found.

Michele Colpron is Vice President of Finance & Investments Administration for CDP Capital which operates as a subsidiary of Caisse de depot et placement du Quebec (CDPQ) and one of their principal construction partners is SNC-Lavalin (40). CDPQ is also the principal shareholder of SNC-Lavalin (38).

Christopher Hickman was the Chairman and CEO of Marco Group, a large construction company (41) that partnered on contracts with SNC-Lavalin (42). He also served on the board of Nalco Energy that also gave contracts to SNC-Lavalin(43).

Stephen Smith was on the board of directors for the CD Howe Institute. SNC-Lavalin is a member of CD Howe Institute (44). Stephen Smith was also on the board METROLINX/Go transit. Metrolix awarded contracts to SNC-Lavalin for Crosslinx Transit Solutions (45).

Patricia Youzwa was CEO of SaskPower that gave SNC-Lavalin millions in contracts (46). Current reports show that SaskPower overpaid 111 million to SNC-Lavalin (47).

The extent to which the foreign criminal syndicate call the shots leave little ability for our elected ministers of parliament to do anything about it. That is, if they are not in on the con to begin with. These people know the agendas, they agree with the agendas, and further the agendas of UN Global Compacts of every sort. SNC is the construction cartel in Canada (48). The amalgamation of the Canada Infrastructure Bank with BlackRock is a non-partisan Red Alert moment for all Canadian Patriots!

5. Sources For Second Article

  1. https://cib-bic.ca/en/board-of-directors/
  2. http://www.unitedway.ca/about-us/our-team/james-c-cherry/
  3. http://www.altalink.ca/files/pdf/reports/2008-Financial-Report.pdf
  4. http://www.centraide-mtl.org/documents/26141/upload/documents/centraide-mtl_rapport_annuel_2010_ang_2.pdf
  5. https://shawnpaulmelville.com/2019/03/03/soros-trudeau-snc-the-canada-investment-bank/
  6. http://www.fondationtrudeau.ca/en/community/tim-brodhead
  7. https://www.fgmtl.org/en/pdf/AR2013.pdf
  8. https://fgmtl.org/en/fcc.php
  9. https://web.archive.org/web/20080609024250/http:/www.fgmtl.org/en/partners.php
  10. https://www.fgmtl.org/en/nouvelle.php?n=74
  11. https://web.archive.org/web/20080610092431/http:/www.fgmtl.org/en/board_fgm.php
  12. http://www.snclavalin.com/en/about-us/board-directors/
  13. http://www.fondationtrudeau.ca/en/community/jacques-bougie
  14. https://virtualglobetrotting.com/map/bill-morneau-and-nancy-mccains-house-in-bennington-heights/view/google/
  15. https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=http://www.trudeaufoundation.ca/fr/activites/evenements/poonam-puri-et-isabella-bakker-au-tedxvaughanwomen-2016&prev=search
  16. https://docplayer.net/8398485-The-role-of-law-schools-and-human-rights.html
  17. http://www.ialsnet.org/
  18. http://ials.symlaw.ac.in/pdf/Pres-release.pdf
  19. https://web.archive.org/web/20171229103229/http://www.ialsnet.org/charter-bylaws/
  20. https://digitalcommons.osgoode.yorku.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=syllabi
  21. https://www.concordia.ca/content/dam/concordia/offices/archives/docs/bog-minutes/2011-12-08.pdf
  22. https://sorosfiles.com/soros/2011/10/the-tides-foundation.html
  23. https://canadafreepress.com/article/soros-tides-canada-under-investigation
  24. http://www.rbc.com/investorrelations/pdf/3rbe10.pdf
  25. http://archives.bulletinsoiq.qc.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=446%3Aguy-st-pierre-nouveau-mentor-de-la-fondation-trudeau&catid=304%3Ale-genie-saffiche&Itemid=280&lang=fr
  26. http://www.snclavalin.com/en/about-us/board-directors/jacques-bougie.aspx
  27. http://www.trudeaufoundation.ca/en/community/jacques-bougie
  28. https://probusvancouver.com/probus-meeting-jane-bird-building-the-canada-line/
  29. http://iqac.jgu.edu.in/document/naac_self-study_report_op_jindal_global_university_june_2015.pdf
  30. http://www.ialsnet.org/meetings/role/papers/vandeKasteelenMichiel%28TheNetherlands%29.pdf
  31. https://news.ontario.ca/mof/en/2014/01/economic-advisory-panel-members.html
  32. http://www.rbc.com/investorrelations/pdf/3rbe10.pdf
  33. https://web.archive.org/web/20170709205858/http://kimbaird.ca/611/
  34. http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2007/07/tsawwassen-first-nations-treaty.html
  35. https://www.ivanhoecambridge.com/en/news-and-media/news/2014/01/tsawwassen-groundbreaking
  36. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/massive-mall-planned-for-tsawwassen-treaty-lands-1.1202844
  37. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivanho%C3%A9_Cambridge
  38. https://montrealgazette.com/business/snc-lavalin-has-made-remarkable-progress-caisse-ceo-says
  39. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/city-awards-west-lrt-contract-1.806639
  40. https://www.cdpq.com/sites/default/files/medias/pdf/en/ra/ra2001_survol_activites_en.pdf
  41. https://www.northernpen.ca/business/three-more-nl-business-leaders-headed-to-ja-hall-of-fame-266488/
  42. http://stjohnsairport.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/News-Release-Grand-Opening-of-Expanded-Terminal-Building_-Departures.pdf
  43. https://www.thetelegram.com/news/myth-nalcor-energy-did-all-engineering-and-procurement-work-252958/
  44. https://www.cdhowe.org/members/S?type=1
  45. https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/04/22/snc-led-group-wins-crossl_n_7120110.html
  46. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/snc-lavalin-carbon-capture-project-saskpower-1.3291554
  47. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/snc-lavalin-carbon-capture-project-saskpower-1.3291554
  48. https://civilianintelligencenetwork.ca/2019/03/07/blackrock-snc-canada-infrastructure-bank-meet-the-global-construction-cartel/

6. Check Out Civilian Intelligence Network


As should be obvious from the work they do, CIN is a great resource for people looking to know the truth about the rot and corruption within Canadian politics. Visit the site and see what else they have done.

Posted on

Climate Propaganda In Academia — Some Big Players

1. Important Links


CLICK HERE, for an intro to the climate change scam.
CLICK HERE, for Disruptive Innovation Framework.
CLICK HERE, for humanizing transitions, energy justice.

CLICK HERE, for Max Boykoff’s article in Scientific American.
CLICK HERE, for Boykoff’s war on science, part I.
CLICK HERE, for Boykoff’s war on science, part II.

2. A Shoutout To Uppity Peasants


It’s only fair to cite the source of these articles, as in the person who shared them. They came from a Prairie Nationalist who’s frequently busy sharpening her pitchfork. Go check out Uppity Peasants for this and other topics.

3. Context For This Article


The topic of climate propaganda has been covered on this site several times (see links in Section #1). However, rather than doing a complete review for each of the remaining articles, a brief commentary will be added.

It’s downright creepy how the emotional manipulation and shameless hucksterism of climate change are treated seriously in academia. Rather than admitting there “may” be something wrong with climate research, the idea is to double down and look for alternative ways to sell the scheme.

Still, if plunging into the messed up world of climate propaganda appeals to you, then you have two options:
(a) Get professional help; or
(b) Keep reading more.

4. Heuristic Of Creative Destruction


Moving beyond the heuristic of creative destruction: Targeting exnovation with policy mixes for energy transitions Martin David Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research – UFZ, Germany.

Scholars looking at policy mixes for the energy transition and seeking to facilitate a move away from fossil-based structures are increasingly addressing the opposite side of innovation. To describe this, the article introduces the concept of exnovation, referring to attempts to end fossil-based technological trajectories in a deliberate fashion. It applies a framework that encompasses innovation and exnovation alike in order to investigate the policy mix of the German energy transition. Beside finding that energy transition policy mixes need to emphasize regulatory instruments more in order to bring about decarbonization, the article also describes some general aspects of the policy mix design required to govern the innovation-exnovation nexus.

Typically, most people want to ADVANCE their societies, but this one considers doing the opposite: leading the public down a less developed lifestyle in order to combat climate change.

5. Bringing About Disruptive Change


A heuristic for conceptualizing and uncovering the determinants of agency in socio-technical transitions Mert Duygana, Michael Stauffachera, Grégoire Meylanb

There has been a growing interest in transition studies on the role of agency in bringing about disruptive change. Previous studies have examined how actors perform institutional work to create legitimacy and transform institutions. In doing so, they have provided insights into specific practices and strategies that actors follow. This paper seeks to complement existing studies by elucidating the foundations of agency that transforms institutions through institutional work. Drawing on institutional sociology and organizational studies, resources, discourses and networks of actors are identified as key elements enabling institutional work practices. The agency of each actor is conceived of as dependent on the configurations it possesses with respect to these elements. A heuristic is presented that helps to determine the configurations associated with a strong agency in empirical settings and use Swiss waste management as an illustrative case example. The heuristic enables a systematic analysis of agency across different organizational fields.

Some research into methods and techniques for bringing about serious and disruptive changes in Western society deemed necessary for environmental protections.

6. Disruption & System Transformation


Disruption and low-carbon system transformation: Progress and new challenges in socio-technical transitions research and the Multi-Level Perspective Frank W. Geels

This paper firstly assesses the usefulness of Christensen’s disruptive innovation framework for low-carbon system change, identifying three conceptual limitations with regard to the unit of analysis (products rather than systems), limited multi-dimensionality, and a simplistic (‘point source’) conception of change. Secondly, it shows that the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP) offers a more comprehensive framework on all three dimensions. Thirdly, it reviews progress in socio-technical transition research and the MLP on these three dimensions and identifies new challenges, including ‘whole system’ reconfiguration, multi-dimensional struggles, bi-directional niche-regime interactions, and an alignment conception of change. To address these challenges, transition research should further deepen and broaden its engagement with the social sciences.

This gem takes the BUSINESS concept of disruptive innovative framework which is meant to introduce new products and technologies into the market. It then tries to apply it to the CLIMATE CHANGE industry in getting changes made.

7. Fighting Opposing “Regime” Against Change


Regime Resistance against Low-Carbon Transitions: Introducing Politics and Power into the Multi-Level Perspective
Frank W Geels University of Manchester and King Abdulaziz Universit

Abstract
While most studies of low-carbon transitions focus on green niche-innovations, this paper shifts attention to the resistance by incumbent regime actors to fundamental change. Drawing on insights from political economy, the paper introduces politics and power into the multi-level perspective. Instrumental, discursive, material and institutional forms of power and resistance are distinguished and illustrated with examples from the UK electricity system. The paper concludes that the resistance and resilience of coal, gas and nuclear production regimes currently negates the benefits from increasing renewables deployment. It further suggests that policymakers and many transition-scholars have too high hopes that ‘green’ innovation will be sufficient to bring about low-carbon transitions. Future agendas in research and policy should therefore pay much more attention to the destabilization and decline of existing fossil fuel regimes.

This paper views political and media types who are skeptical of the climate change industry as “resistance” and studies way around them. No real sense that they may bring up valid points. Instead, they are an obstacle to progress.

8. Humanizing And “Energy Justice”


Humanizing sociotechnical transitions through energy justice: An ethical framework for global transformative change
Kirsten Jenkins, Benjamin K. Sovacoolb, Darren McCaule

Poverty, climate change and energy security demand awareness about the interlinkages between energy systems and social justice. Amidst these challenges, energy justice has emerged to conceptualize a world where all individuals, across all areas, have safe, affordable and sustainable energy that is, essentially, socially just. Simultaneously, new social and technological solutions to energy problems continually evolve, and interest in the concept of sociotechnical transitions has grown. However, an element often missing from such transitions frameworks is explicit engagement with energy justice frameworks. Despite the development of an embryonic set of literature around these themes, an obvious research gap has emerged: can energy justice and transitions frameworks be combined? This paper argues that they can. It does so through an exploration of the multi-level perspective on sociotechnical systems and an integration of energy justice at the model’s niche, regime and landscape level. It presents the argument that it is within the overarching process of sociotechnical change that issues of energy justice emerge. Here, inattention to social justice issues can cause injustices, whereas attention to them can provide a means to examine and potential resolve them.

The social justice nonsense which universities push is about to get a new member, so-called “energy justice”. Consider this a bastardized child of cultural Marxism and the climate change scam.

9. Regime Destabilization, Pulp & Paper


Explaining regime destabilisation in the pulp and paper industry
Kersti Karltorp, Björn A. Sandén

abstract
.
A transition to a carbon neutral society will require a shift from fossil to renewable resources. This will affect the conversion of biomass and related industries such as the pulp and paper industry. The purpose of this paper is two-fold: first, to describe and analyse the transformation processes in the Swedish pulp and paper industry and the adoption of biorefinery options, and second, to demonstrate how conceptualisations from strategic management can be used to describe regime destabilisation. The industry’s adoption of biorefinery options has been modest so far, but there is development along two trajectories. The first centres on gasification and the second on separation and refining. Such diverging strategies in response to external pressure can be explained by differences that exist between firms. Signs of increasing firm divergence, or ‘regime fragmentation’, might indicate the entry into a phase of regime destabilisation, and a critical point in a transition.

Sure, let’s make the pulp and paper industry completely unprofitable and put all of those workers out on the street. Rather than finding better solutions, let’s sabotage what already exists. While it is true you can’t make an omelette without breaking a few eggs, this seems excessive.

10. Apply Pressure To Destabilize Industries


Sequence and alignment of external pressures in industry destabilisation: Understanding the downfall of incumbent utilities in the German energy transition (1998–2015) Gregor Kungla, Frank W. Geels

ABSTRACT
This article makes two contributions to the emerging research stream on regime and industry destabilisation in the transition literature. First, we replicate the multi-dimensional framework developed by Turnheim and Geels with a more contemporary study that has closer links to sustainability transitions. Drawing on a wide range of primary and secondary sources, we analyse the destabilisation of the German electricity industry, which faced multiple external pressures: renewable energy technologies, nuclear phase-out policy, the financial-economic crisis, and negative public debates. Second, we elaborate the role of multiple pressures in industry destabilisation, focusing in particular on their sequence and alignment. We inductively identify patterns such as the ‘masking effect’ of highly visible macro-shocks, ‘perfect storm’ pattern, a ‘killer blow’ effect, and spillover dynamics between external environments.

Not sure what to add to this. If industries are considered to be environmentally unsound, let’s apply various pressures in order to destabilize and destroy them.

11. Politically Accelerated Transitions


Conditions for politically accelerated transitions: Historical institutionalism, the multi-level perspective, and two historical case studies in transport and agriculture Cameron Roberts, Frank W. Geels

ABSTRACT
This article investigates the conditions under which policymakers are likely to decisively accelerate sociotechnical transitions. We develop a conceptual framework that combines insights from historical institutionalism and the Multi-Level Perspective to better understand the political dimension in transitions, focusing particularly on the mechanisms of political defection from incumbent regime to niche-innovation. We distinguish two ideal type patterns, one where external (landscape) shocks create a ‘critical juncture’ and one where gradual feedbacks change the balance of power between niche-innovation and regime. We also identify more proximate conditions such as external pressures on policymakers (from business interests, mass publics, and technologies) and policy internal developments (changes in problem definitions and access to institutional arrangements). We apply this framework to two historical case studies in which UK policymakers deliberately accelerated transitions: the transition from rail to road transport (1920–1970); and the transition from traditional mixed agriculture to specialised wheat agriculture (1920–1970). We analyse the conditions for major policy change in each case and draw more general conclusions. We also discuss implications for contemporary low-carbon transitions, observing that while some favourable conditions are in place, they do not yet meet all the prerequisites for political acceleration.

This is basically the same concept as before: gutting and destroying various industries. However, this one involves using political pressure in order to achieve it.

12. Plant Based Milk?


Rage against the regime: Niche-regime interactions in the societal embedding of plant-based milk
Josephine Mylana, Carol Morris, Emma Beech, Frank W. Geel

This paper engages with the debate on niche-regime interactions in sustainability transitions, using a study of plant-based milk and its struggles against the entrenched liquid dairy-milk regime, which has various sustainability problems. Plant-based milk isunder-studied, so our empirical contribution consists of an exploration of its diffusion in the UK. We make three conceptual contributions. The first calls for a bidirectional analysis that addresses niche-orientedactivities by incumbent actors, in addition to the outward-oriented activities by niche advocates presented in most studies of niche-regime interaction.The second contribution nuances Smith and Raven’s fit-and-conform and stretch-and-transform typology: using a societal embedding framework which distinguishes four environments, we suggest that hybrid patterns are possible in which innovations follow a ‘fit’ pattern in one environment but ‘stretch’ in another. The third contribution highlights th epotential role of cultural meanings in galvanizing transitions by eroding positive associations that support theregime and stabilise consumer purchasing.

 

Plant based milk?
Okay, hello unemployed dairy farmers.

13. Destructiveness Of This Agenda

Under the guise of “protecting the environment”, these academics conduct research in how to undermine and destabilize existing industries. There seems to be no concern for the workers and families who will be impacted if these efforts are successful.

Of course, there are many more authors doing this sort of work, but this is a fairly accurate representation of what is going on. Ways to impose their agenda on others.

These people are serious about it.
They really want to bring about the end of Western society.

Posted on

PPC Announces It Is Being Shut Down (Satire)

(The following is satire/parody. Don’t take too literally.)

Good evening, everyone.

This is to announce that the party is being shut down, effective today. During my lunch break, I filled out the paperwork to de-register the party with Elections Canada.

About all those people I smeared over the last year, including those who voted for me in 2017, it is not personal. The Laurentian Swamp wanted me to become the leader, and the Dairy Cartel messed it up by rigging the final vote. You have to understand, that sometimes 2 wrongs really do make a right.

The party was meant to be a long term project, and to permanently alter the course of Canadian politics. Now, some people criticize the lack of progress in setting up the party structure. For example, there is still no constitution, by-laws, membership regulations, EDA rules, or any sort of Governing Council or governing documents. Well d’uh. It would have made it much harder to shut everything down if that apparatus was in place. Worked out pretty well.

On the topic of paperwork, Elections Canada has been really annoying lately asking for “financials” from all of the EDAs. They are also concerned that EDAs list a lot of people who have left the party a long time ago. Sometimes it’s easier just to cut your losses.

True, we skipped out on electing party leaders, or holding policy votes. But those sorts of debates just get really messy and divisive. Arguing gets us nowhere. Better to be united from the start. Our party strength comes from the fact that healthy discussion is encouraged. We are opening the Overton window on policy topics.

I want to thank Frank at KWG for putting up the billboards and giving me plausible deniability. You’re looking great since that fundraiser June last year. Cleared up the last of my leadership debt. But seriously Cody, stop grinning like that. I’m trying not to make it too obvious.

I also wish to thank Glen for that hoax of an email allegedly coming from Germany. Thankfully, it wasn’t too big a stunt, but it did generate the publicity we so desperately needed. Worked out well. The feigned outrage made enough of a splash to cast us as the real victims, without much scrutiny.

The platform is a populist one, because we “identify” it as such. Sure, we support Harper level mass migration from the 3rd world: 250,000/year, plus students, plus temps (all with pathway to permanent residence), but it’s different because it is labelled as populist. Certainly, the globalized free trade agenda outsources our industries and decimates communities, but look at those stock prices. And while we lecture about cutting the deficit, we will never tell you about the Bank for International Settlements which CAUSE the debt. We will focus on the Dairy Cartel, in order to distract you from the Banking Cartel. And while the new milk from the U.S. is filled with growth hormones, remember, it’s cheaper. Remember, it is “populist” because we identify it as such.

Those racist ethno-nationalists are not welcome in our party, and have no place here. Okay, we went from 96% European in 1971 to 72% in 2016. And yes, Europeans will be a minority by 2030. But racists who keep pointing that out are not permitted in the party. Nor are people who criticize large numbers of foreign cultures. Multiculturalism is great, but the difference is that we don’t pander to it. We just quietly accept population replacement.

Also, those who want to impose their will on others have no place in Conservative Inc. For example, those who believe abortion is murder are allowed to have private beliefs, but we will not advance their interests. Similarly, those who oppose funding pride parades, or drag queen story hour are bigoted and intolerant. Our party (while it lasted) was open to all sorts of people and identities.

Trudeau is a globalist who will sell us out to the United Nations. He will lobby again for a Security Council seat, and make us a part of the UN Parliamentary Assembly. I know how these work because as Foreign Affairs Minister I supported both. Globalism is a dangerous ideology, and we must be prepared to fight it.

Anyhow, please welcome the new leader of the Conservative Party, Rona Ambrose. I would criticize the roughshod way the CPC held their party nomination. In all fairness, however, at least they held one. At this point I ask everyone to unite behind her and to help them remove Trudeau at the first available opportunity. Sure, I call them “morally and intellectually bankrupt”, but I did spend a decade in government with them. They can’t be that bad.

Yes, a lot of you paid for those 5 year membership renewals over the last few weeks. Sorry, no refunds.

Anyhow, I’m off to go set up my Parliamentary pension.

Good bye.