The other day, I was speaking to my wife on how it was distressing to see that there is a building case on the Canadian Prime Minister, that him and his people are corrupt. I didn’t want to believe it, but there are three specific situations that cause me to second-guess his honorable image. Today’s entry will quickly go over the three situations, hopefully saving you time in surfing the web, allowing you to be more educated on what’s happening in the country.

Aga Khan
– a billionaire who has received millions of dollars through Federal grants for work overseas (foreign aid)
– the PM received a private trip to the Bahamas (owned by Aga Khan) in 2016
– what is considered inappropriate: accepting the trip & accepting private transportation
– the PM argues that they did not discuss government business with Aga Khan, but could be inferred that he’s been influenced towards his interests
– all private transportation for the PM must be cleared with the Ethic’s Office, which he didn’t do
– an example of his potential influence: not excusing himself from official discussions on a $15 million endowment to the institution directly related to Aga Khan
– clear conflict of interest that he doesn’t avoid b/c he feels that Aga Khan is a “close family friend” and a “friend of Canada”
– there has been $300 million by the Canadian Government given to projects run by the Aga Khan Foundation since 1981

SNC Lavalin (engineering, procurement & construction company)
– this company bribed foreign officials to obtain government contracts
– SNC lobbied lawmakers to avoid criminal convictions that would cause them to lose those contracts/future contracts
– SNC claimed this (bribery) was the work of rogue employees
– the Attorney General claimed that the PM and the PMO (Prime Minister Office) pressured her to spare the company from criminal prosecution
– the problem: the AG is not supposed to be influenced or coerced by anyone
– after the AG refused, she was transferred to a different position (can be seen as installing someone else more pliable)
– the PM argues he did this to protect Canadian jobs, coincidentally ones affected by his riding

WE Charity (organization to alleviate poverty internationally, create learning programs for children in the US, UK & Canada)
– examples of family members being paid for speaking engagements, but failing to excuse himself (PM) from the cabinet decision on the contract
– immediate family members benefiting from intimate connections with the PM
– 2017 Canada Day, PM asked WE Charity to host and feature his mother (getting paid 8k per appearance)

Personal opinion: When it comes to leaders, I feel like we need to hold them to a very high standard. It doesn’t mean that they’re not human and can’t make mistakes, but they do need to learn from them and try to be better. These examples seem to highlight a continual disregard for the rules (ethical rules of being in office). For Aga Khan, the PM should rely on the merits of the Aga Khan foundation’s track record and his possibly perceived conflict of interest should have him excuse himself from any decision making that utilizes Canadians money. For SNC Lavalin, protecting jobs is important, but a crime is a crime and we shouldn’t be influencing the AG or removing them from office to get someone that will be more lenient. Finally for We Charity, it is a similar situation as Aga Khan, where the PM should excuse himself from the conversation, as there is a conflict of interest.