A Critical Assessment Of Why Snc Lavalin Has Faced This Crisis

The scandal in Canada involving Brian Mulroney and Karlheinz Schreiber revolving around deals with the Airbus Company is said to be the longest-running scandal in the history of Canada. The official government report published by the "Commission of Inquiry into Certain Allegations Respecting Business and Financial Dealings Between Karlheinz Schreiber and the Right Honourable Brian Mulroney" concluded that on three different occasions Mulroney received ""¦thousands of dollars in cash, in envelopes," from Schreiber. This paper delves into the illegal arrangement and reports on the results of investigations as well as noting what questions might have been left unanswered at the conclusion of the official investigations.

Prime Ministers receive significant responsibility once they are elected into power and whilst managing that intense pressure is where corruption takes place. The concept of one person having all the power has been in the world for decades now and yet, the outcome is always the same: degrading integrity and crookedness. In some of the most severe examples, there has even been death involved. Although, Canada’s Parliament has not reached that point of harshness and might never, corruption has taken place within our government and as a result of this, public policy has suffered. As the polls on election night come to a close, the title of Prime Minister is granted to one person who receives the opportunity to run their country.The notion of giving one individual such intense power has created a downfall within our society and therefore causing damage in areas of public policy that one person cannot be fully knowledgeable in thus leading to corruption. When a Prime Minsters enters office, they become the face of our entire nation, including people who voted for them and even those against them. Therefore, their decisions and actions should benefit everyone, but it does not always work that way.

Under Lesage, the Laissez-Faire ideology, dominant from 1945 to 1960, gave way to energetic activism. Government action became the response to internal conflicts and provincial control was extended over many industries that were previously privately owned. Alongside with these rapid changes in the structure and responsibilities of Quebec’s government, the notion grew that

The problems to be investigated are the business ethics and practices of Goldman Sachs. There were several grey areas in which Goldman Sachs operated their business.

Another attack at the French Canadian heritage came in the form Pierre Trudeau's 'Just Society' ideology. Trudeau had promised René Levesque that that separate nationwide referendums in order to amend both, the Constitution, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms8. However, Trudeau went back on his word to Levesque, and decided to make amendments with the other provinces without the input of Quebec9. Through the personal actions of Trudeau towards Quebec, he made a very unjust decision, as he did not keep his initial promise to Levesque, in which he said he would discuss amendments with Levesque as well. By creating several agreements with the other provinces, ensuring a majority over Quebec, he displayed the traits of an unjust society. Trudeau`s poor decision came at the expense of French Canadian heritage, as their needs were not met. In conclusion, the threat to French Canadian heritage played an important role in the needs of French Canadians not being met.

“Gens du pays, c 'est votre tour, De vous laisser parler d 'amour”, those were the only words to be heard across the arena, as Rene Levesque, then Prime Minister of Quebec delivered his speech on the defeat of the Sovereignty Association Referendum. His speech, “À la prochaine fois” (“Until next time”) was one that he hoped to never deliver during his lifetime. On May 20th, 1980, the long awaited referendum that would lead to negotiations with Canada for the province, Quebec, resulted in a resounding no, with a 59.5% vote. (Lévesque, 1980) The defeat marked a resounding blow and stalemate to Levesque’s hopes of establishing an independent Quebec and defeating his long term rival, Pierre Trudeau. In an emotionally wrought campaign that swept the nation, the outcome of the referendum was determined by Quebec Prime Minister, Rene Levesque’s inability to manipulate ambiguous language where Trudeau succeeded, swaying the largely uncertain voters in favour of the federalists. Though the two principles of the respective sides contradicted each other, and was thus, the underlying cause of the referendum, it was the personal nature of the conflict between Trudeau and Levesque coupled with the manipulation of language that would ultimately influence the results of the referendum.

The article takes up an audit event that dominated Canadian national politics for the first three quarters of the year 2000. The proximate cause

Despite the violations as a result of the bill, Mr. Drainville claimed that the majority of 68 percent of Quebecers were in favour of passing the bill. When the bill was denied, the issue was “solved”, despite it being the minority not in favour. This is proof that the solution of not passing the bill was not enough of a solution, as many people wanted neutralism in the public work force. (CBC News, 2013)

Prior to the Quebec Referendums, many national movements in regards to national movement which drove nationalism of French ethnicity. In order to understand what the Quebec Referendums reveal about Canadian government reveals, the context the Quebec Referendum was set needs to be understood as well as the existing strained relationship between Canadians and Quebecois. Prior to the referendums, Quebec nationalists and federalists have been dominant figures in Canadian politics. In essence, this paper explores 1) the context prior to the referendum in order to illustrate the significance of the Quebec referendum, 2) briefly discuss the referendum results and 3) tie in the following in order to exemplify what the Quebec Referendums reveal about Canadian Government. As this paper will illustrate, the referendums are multi-faceted issues and as Boucher brings up, what happen to the true Canadianism, "compromising to avoid confrontation and reaching consensus"? Unfortunately for Quebecois, in order to protect their distinct identity, they have been depicted as an insensitive tyrant by dealing with direct confrontation. On a superficial level, the Quebec Referendums reveal the Canadian government is divided amongst two distinct cultures of Quebecois and Inuit who make up a

In the history of Canadian government, two scandals have brought down two federal governments in Canada since confederation. The Pacific Scandal in1873 under the leadership of John A. Macdonald and the Sponsorship Scandal in 1995 under Jean Chrétien both led to the demise of each government. The Sponsorship Scandal, which began in 1995, was a more serious scandal due to the legal, ethical and long lasting political ramifications of the scandal.

The Quiet Revolution refers to the developments which transpired during the late 1950’s to 1970’s that influenced the socio-political and socio-cultural standing of Quebec in Canada. This was a period of expeditious modifications which highlighted Quebec’s desire to become an individual nation. The goal of this essay is to bestow enough evidence in order to reveal the role of The Quiet Revolution in encouraging the incidents of the October Crisis which changed Quebec’s standing in the syndicate of Canadian institutions.

Most notable among the many reasons for the Quebecois electing the Parti Québécois to power is the

The 1990’s in Canada proved to be a relatively quiet and peaceful time in Canadian History. With this era, came the new, or sometimes already known, historical figures to shape the economy, government and the well being of the people during the time. From 1993-2003 came the rule of Prime Minister Jean Chretien, a leader from who was born in the small town of Shawinigan, Quebec. He proved to be a strong leader with his determination and strive to be “‘“a fighter. He must win.’” as his friend Jean Pelletier described him (Bothwell, Marshall & Koch, 2015). Under him, came Paul Martin who after rivaling against him in the fight for liberal leadership, was appointed Finance minister. He too seemed to have quite the influence of the people and proved

The largest moral and legal issue that is applicable to both cases as well as most other scandals and affairs in the government is a lack of transparency (Aucoin, 2006). In the Pacific scandal, Macdonald went behind the backs of the people of Canada and many people in his government and wrongly sold the rights to the railway. This demonstrates a lack of transparency because the public was unaware of what he was doing. It is unquestionably crucial to our democratic system that the public has unwavering faith in their leader who can be trusted to uphold a certain degree of morality. There was also a lack of transparency in the Sponsorship scandal because Chretien chose to direct the program from the PMO (Prime Ministers Office) and bypassed the procedures that the Deputy Minister of Public Works and Governmental Services Canada (PWGSC) generally are expected to follow (Aucoin, 2006). Furthermore, the Deputy Minister of PWGSC failed to provide any safeguards that would prevent the misuse of the funds in the program (Aucoin, 2006). Due to blatant lack of administrative control, it is not surprising that a scandal

René Lévesque’s memoir was and still is a good and reliable source because the limitations are meagre compared to the extensive validity and usefulness that is provided in the writing. René Lévesque is a credible source because he was the leader of the Parti Quebecois, which provided insight on the ins and outs of the political system and also allowed him to know any confidential information. He was also the voice of many individuals who were wronged. The content of the specific excerpt from his memoir reflects the resentfulness and anger Lévesque still has towards Trudeau, even after 20 years has passed. This emphasizes Lévesque’s strong and unchanged views towards Trudeau. “… without warrant, on the strength of suspicions, prejudice or pure idiocy…” , “Trudeau and the company