Question, if alleged a political party commits a criminal offence, specifically obstruction of justice, is not a Member of Parliament who supports or feigns ignorance of the allegation obstructing justice themselves?
By the virtue of the oath of office all MP’s have serious obligations and responsibilities. New Brunswick MP Wayne Long gets that backbenchers have this duty and has called for a full investigation into the PMO SNC-Lavalin scandal. Alleged obstruction of justice by the PMO is a profoundly serious offence, and a violation of the oath of office. This is where rubber meets the road, and party allegiance thrown out the window. Longfield has failed in not calling for a full investigation.
A backbencher has a duty to involve themselves in matters about alleged corruption, and not doing so is in direct violation of a member’s oath of office. To remain silent is participation and agreement to obstruction of justice.
When Longfield swore his oath to allegiance to the Queen as Sovereign of Canada he also pledged allegiance to the institutions the Queen stands for, which includes the concept of democracy. This obligation is core to the Constitution Act, 1867. The allegations and actions of the Liberal Party and the PMO is far from democratic.
Changes to the criminal code in the recent budget have heightened concerns about the allegations against the PMO. Essentially changes to the criminal code allow for corporations to allow for deals alleged that the PMO wanted to see, a remediation agreement where the company pays a fine but avoids a conviction and gets to keep bidding on government contracts. Corporations should not have protection from criminal matters.
Longfield supported the budget publicly and strongly in the House of Commons. Buried deep in the budget, in an omnibus bill Trudeau said he would not do, many have been blindsided by this. Remarkable that these changes were result of lobbying efforts of SNC-Lavalin.
Even more remarkable and extremely disappointing Longfield supports this. Our MP feels changes to the criminal code protect employees. Yet, made in direct relation to discussions about SNC-Lavalin and in this case, reek partisanship, and protection of a major corporation who has lobbied and donated to the Liberal Party of Canada for decades. This is not a matter you ignore.
Based on his statements published by Guelphtoday, Longfield supports a two-tier justice system whereby corporations such as SNC-Lavalin can continue to receive help from government contracts despite blatantly breaking the law. This was not a “misstep” of SNC-Lavalin. These are serious charges against a corporation who made the list of one of the most corrupt corporations – in the world, not just nationally.
The allegation that the PMO pressured former Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould to duly influence the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin is a serious allegation. The charges levelled at this corporation are related to bribery, fraud, and corruption.
How does Longfield define a misstep? Good to know his guiding values and principles on corporate crime are questionable. What his statements and actions show is that his loyalty lies fully with the Liberal Party. Not his constituents. Not for guiding Canadian values. And certainly, not his oath of office. It is just politics, and worse, the partisan type.
The RCMP must investigate the PMO. Canadians gave the Liberals the chance to do what is right, yet the Justice Committee and Liberal MP’s who choose to tow party line do not take their oath of office as seriously as they should.
The only light in all this is that SNC-Lavalin did not receive help from these changes, so karma kicked in.
Values always become known in times of adversity.
Sad we cannot count on Longfield to direct himself on values or conscience. If he does not feel it is his place to abide by his oath of office, he should resign his seat.
Longfield needs a reminder of what the job of MP entails, and Guelph can send him a message October 2019.
Guelph deserves more than a representative who works solely for partisan interests.