FSTDT Forums
Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: Chaos Undivided on February 28, 2019, 05:31:26 pm
-
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/02/canadian-opposition-leader-calls-trudeau-resign-190228113038516.html (https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/02/canadian-opposition-leader-calls-trudeau-resign-190228113038516.html)
https://www.theweek.co.uk/99910/will-justin-trudeau-resign-as-canadian-pm (https://www.theweek.co.uk/99910/will-justin-trudeau-resign-as-canadian-pm)
I always thought Trudeau came off as a bit disingenuous, but I didn't expect him to interfere in a prosecution. Assuming the allegations are true, of course.
What do this board's Canadian members think?
-
SNC Lavalin?
I admit I haven't been paying much attention, but it's kind of a joke that the prosecution is happening in the first place: it's basically impossible to get anything done in the places where they were doing business without bribing people.
-
SNC Lavalin?
I admit I haven't been paying much attention, but it's kind of a joke that the prosecution is happening in the first place: it's basically impossible to get anything done in the places where they were doing business without bribing people.
So you are for letting corporations brake the law to do business and in doing so reinforce the corruption in another country?
-
SNC Lavalin?
I admit I haven't been paying much attention, but it's kind of a joke that the prosecution is happening in the first place: it's basically impossible to get anything done in the places where they were doing business without bribing people.
So you are for letting corporations brake the law to do business and in doing so reinforce the corruption in another country?
I don't know about dpareja, but I'm for punishing corporations for the actions they're currently performing, not for actions done a decade ago by people who are no longer employed. And the facts of this case look a whole lot like the Attorney General in question decided she was going to PUNISH SNC Lavalin as badly as she could, consequences to anybody in Canada right now be damned, and when the people around her became concerned and decided she might not be the right person to be AG if she's going to go off randomly like this, she started screaming about "everyone trying to stop her". And then the Conservative Party of Canada jumped on it, because of course they did.
-
I guess the main issue here is, are corporations accountable for the things they do or does the accountability end with the people? Can any corporation wash the blood from their hands by giving a golden parachute to the managers who oversaw illegal actions?
-
Systematically, penalizing an entity such as a corporation is important because it influences the cost-benefit calculations included in its decisions. If you create an expectation for the entity that it can escape punishment because of a set of circumstances it incentivizes the individuals within the entity to create these circumstances instead of avoiding doing harm in the first place. In this case, the message is that if you can hide the misdeed long enough, you can keep the benefits. The long term harm in creating these expectations can exceed the short term harm caused by the punishment.
Notice that I am not aware of the details in this case. I am working with the logic used in other similar circumstances.
-
I guess the main issue here is, are corporations accountable for the things they do or does the accountability end with the people? Can any corporation wash the blood from their hands by giving a golden parachute to the managers who oversaw illegal actions?
You also have to be careful, though. If the Attorney General becomes such a thorn in the side of the corporation in question that they decide it's no longer worth doing business in your country because of her, a lot of people are going to lose their jobs. And one of the things that caught my attention in this story is that part of the "interference" she's screaming about is asking her why she REFUSES TO WORK OUT ANY KIND OF PLEA DEAL, despite the people around her telling her that's probably the most appropriate action to take. It sounds to me like she didn't just want to fine the company; she wanted to BREAK them, and that's what got the other high level guys asking questions.
I don't think corporations should be let off easily for breaking the law. I DO think you need to consider circumstances and what could happen if you push really hard, though; corporations have ways of making the workers and the customers feel the pain they're expected to feel. In this case, I think it would be better to fine the company and go after the now-departed executives for any crimes, not try to break the company. The latter helps nobody, except the executives (who will loot the corpse and run for it, and everyone knows it).
-
SNC Lavalin?
I admit I haven't been paying much attention, but it's kind of a joke that the prosecution is happening in the first place: it's basically impossible to get anything done in the places where they were doing business without bribing people.
So you are for letting corporations brake the law to do business and in doing so reinforce the corruption in another country?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/libya-snc-1.5014939
The problem is that some countries are simply too corrupt for businesses (or individuals) to get anything done without playing along. Going after one company for it makes no sense unless you're going to go after all of them, which you're probably not going to do.
Foreign corrupt practices acts look good on paper, but don't really reflect the reality of doing business in a lot of places.
-
SNC Lavalin?
I admit I haven't been paying much attention, but it's kind of a joke that the prosecution is happening in the first place: it's basically impossible to get anything done in the places where they were doing business without bribing people.
So you are for letting corporations brake the law to do business and in doing so reinforce the corruption in another country?
Ultimately, what really concerns me about this bullshit is because of the dumb way Canadian politics works, this might lead the dumbasses in this country to do what the US did with Trump; elect the Total Scumbag Party because the other party MIGHT have done something that may or may not be scumbaggy. This is how we ended up with 9 years of King Stephen the First acting like he was the God-appointed King of Canada and spitting all over our people to bend over for the Republican Party. I don't know about anyone else, but I would prefer NOT to go back to that.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/libya-snc-1.5014939
The problem is that some countries are simply too corrupt for businesses (or individuals) to get anything done without playing along. Going after one company for it makes no sense unless you're going to go after all of them, which you're probably not going to do.
Foreign corrupt practices acts look good on paper, but don't really reflect the reality of doing business in a lot of places.