Why you Shouldn't Care About 'Climate Change'

I enjoy watching JEOPARDY each weeknight not only to be entertained by the quiz show that tests the general knowledge of some very smart contestants but also to be reminded about how dumb experts can really be.

No doubt the contestants have a great well of knowledge, quick recall and good reflexes under pressure, but they also generally (certainly not all) suffer from a distinct lack of understanding of game theory and basic applied mathematics.

While extremely smart and capable, they are mostly stupid when it comes to betting strategically.
Many games have been lost by contestants making the wrong bet at the wrong time, something that is painfully obvious to those who watch who aren't as smart but who understand betting and strategy.

Every player who participates in the World Series of Poker has a better understanding of how betting strategies affect outcomes, compared to 75% of Jeopardy players..
My wife who admittedly doesn't answer as many questions correctly has a background in book-keeping  and an uncanny ability to analyze and point out how stupidly contestants bet, with simple and devastating logic and deconstruction that is unassailable.

All to say that though experts and scientists may have an overwhelming handle on the subject that they have devoted their life to, it doesn't mean they can extrapolate their expertise into realms or fields that they have no special expertise in.
Like Jeopardy contestants, they can be brilliant, yet painfully stupid as well.
As they say ...Experts built the Titanic.

The same climate experts who cannot predict whether our Sunday picnic will be rain-free are telling us with absolute certainty that the world is on the eve of climate destruction.
Of course, the apologists will lecture us not to confuse weather with climate whenever we are hit with a particularly harsh winter (like this year,) but when a particularly hot or dry spell occurs, scream to high Heaven that it is because of climate change.
They have the distinct aura of doomsday predictors whom have plagued the Earth since the rise of mankind.
I'm reminded of those cult leaders who predict the end of the world on a certain date, only to see that date come and go. You'd think followers would leave in droves but the leader just picks a new distant date and count on the gullibility of adherents who remain faithful.
As for the media, it is complicit in fostering panic with predictions of doomsday climate scenarios, frightening us because it sells newspapers or keeps eyes on the news channel. Most reporters and pundits are lazy and stupid and editors are loathe to present arguments against the conventional wisdom.
This past summer Montreal was hit with a heat wave which of course triggered panicked reports in the media of increased of deaths caused by climate change.

“Quebec health authorities say that up to 70 deaths have been linked to the recent heat wave that gripped the province for nearly a week.” screamed the headlines

Dozens of similar stories appeared across the media, but months later when the data was analyzed by Santé Quebec, the number of reported deaths during the heat wave period was the same as the year before.
Did that make headline news?

“The study — published in the British journal The Lancet — analyzed data on more than 74 million deaths in 13 countries between 1985 and 2012. Of those, 5.4 million deaths were related to cold, while 311,000 were related to heat.”

In other words, cold climate kills twenty times more people than hot climate.
How come the media never runs stories about deaths caused by extreme cold?

Let us examine some issues;

THE SCIENTIFIC TRACK RECORD:

Scientists and global warmers celebrities like Al Gore have been predicting all sorts of disasters since the 1990s. According to Gore, we'd all be under water by now and the world would be on the brink of disaster.
The Northwest passage was to be clear of ice and the shorelines of coastal areas like Florida flooding.

The famous 'Hockey Stick graph is an illustration of dumbing down the science in order to elicit a sympathetic public response.

“Climate scientist Stephen Schneider......let some unusual truth slip when he told Discover magazine in 1989, “To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective and being honest.”

And so the great "Hockey Stick" graph (it resembles the shape of a hockey stick) of 2001 which was presented so that even idiots could see the bad situation that the Earth was in.

“The hockey stick graph is widely regarded as controversial, if not plain wrong. “The hockey stick, the poster-child of the global warming community, turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics,” physicist Richard Muller wrote in Technology Review in 2004. Others have described it as rubbish or even as a downright fraud.”

So much for the past.
What is galling is that these same debunked scientists and promoters have never apologized for frightening us for nothing. They continue today to brush off past false predictions with new predictions.

This AP story was written by PETER JAMES SPIELMANN June 29, 1989

UNITED NATIONS (AP) _ A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.

Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ″eco- refugees,′ ′ threatening political chaos, said Noel Brown, director of the New York office of the U.N. Environment Program, or UNEP.
He said governments have a 10-year window of opportunity to solve the greenhouse effect before it goes beyond human control.

Ha! ha!

Has Mr. Brown apologized for his alarmism?

Nope... He soldiers on in the climate world of misinformation.

In 2003, three years after his predictions of climate doom were debunked, he was awarded an Honorary doctorate from Pace university.  Hooray!!

Let me present a simple scenario to you climate-change fanatics.
You have a stockbroker who tells you that he has a stock that is set to triple in price because he has inside information.
You're excited and you throw a huge chunk of your savings into the stock.
Instead of tripling, the stock tanks and you lose most of the invested money.
Your broker never apologizes for his gaffe and instead phones you a few months later to tell you that he has another stock that will quadruple in price.
You're a sucker, so you give him a second chance and invest more, but the stock, like the first, tanks anyways.
Are you furious when he phones you a year later to announce a new sure-fire stock? (Assuming you haven't fired him yet)
If you are a climate fanatic you probably give him yet another chance because you are a sucker, the same one that PT Barnum told us is born every day.
That is why Al Gore still has a fan base.
Every ten years we are told we have only ten years to react to global warming, yet ten years have come and gone three or four times during the debate and we haven't seen the predicted collapse.
Ho-hum...

Pseudo-Scientists like Bill Nye are so dumb that his predictions can only be accepted by the most naive and stupid.
He has told an interviewer that as the world heats up food production in North America will shift north to Canada, a place according to him that doesn't have the infrastructure or technology to handle the load.
His ignorance of capitalism (and Canada) is appalling. Canada already produces and exports agricultural and meat products. Ramping up production is what capitalists love to do. Telling us that Canada can't do so is based on ignorant conjecture.

The same goes for scientists that produce maps showing the coastline of Florida disappearing under several feet of seawater created by melting ice caps.
Do you actually think that building a four, five or ten feet sand berm is beyond the capability of our society? Will we actually let our coastlines sink into the ocean when a relatively cheap sea wall can take care of the problem with relatively little expense versus climate remediation?

Ever since I can remember, scientists have told us that the population explosion will destroy Earth, because the planet cannot possibly support so many new people.
That prediction itself was false as modern technology in agriculture has done very well in meeting the needs of hungry new mouths. But there's no doubt that an increasing population does put a strain on the environment and reducing population is perhaps the greatest remedial action we can take vis a vis the environment.
Of course, nobody would dare demand families reduce the number of babies they produce, as China did with its one-baby policy.

But lo and behold the world's population is set to peak soon and then to dramatically decline.
Already in the western developed world, the birth rate has declined to the point that population levels cannot be maintained naturally. We see this in Canada as in the rest of 'richer' countries where immigrants are needed to shore up the population.
In Europe and North America we haven't seen the decline in population because we import people from the third world, but in Japan, a country that is loathe to import non-natives, the reality of population decline is already a fact, with population declining steadily over the last seven years.
As the under-developed world modernizes, so too will population levels fall in these countries as women no longer desire to pump out babies as their primary function.
China gave up its one-baby policy in 2016 because of a falling population and despite allowing families to have more children, the population is dropping precipitously.
This trend (and I'm loathe to make predictions) seems ready to sweep the undeveloped world as women become empowered and see motherhood has a part of their lives, but not the only thing in their lives..
Of course, it is a trend 'experts' could not have foreseen, a so-called 'black-swan event,' but the effect on the environment will be staggering.

Climate doomsayers cannot or will not consider the effect because it is beyond their scope. The coming population collapse is perhaps the 'deus ex machina ' of the climate debate, precluding the need for remedial action.

As for the dire predictions of catastrophe with increased temperature, the predictions are figments of imagination.  Nobody really knows.
If some areas of the world become uninhabitable because of heat, other areas in Russia and Canada will become more inhabitable.

All that being said, if man-made global warming is real, and it's going to affect our lives, don't worry about it because there's nothing to be done.

Good intentions aside, mankind hasn't been able to end war and it won't be able to reduce our impact on climate. Period

Are we really going to reduce our standard of living by the required effort?
Will you get rid of your car.
Will you sell your big homes and move to a tiny apartment?
Will you become a vegetarian?
Will air travel cease?
Will your backyard BBQ be banned?
Will you tolerate $10-litre gas prices?
Will you willingly pay three times as much to heat your home with green energy?
Will commuting to work by any means be banned from the suburbs with people forced to live near their jobs?

What happens when your job is cut because of its impact on climate?
We have witnessed the collapse of the oil industry in Alberta, causing a catastrophic loss of over 100,000 jobs. What would happen if that trend was felt across the country as jobs are shed because of climate considerations?
While we accept the job losses in Alberta, will we accept the loss of a million jobs in Quebec and Ontario?
We are all heroes when it is someone else who is suffering or paying the bill. Not so much when it is us

Those of you who say you are willing to sacrifice for generations to come are liars.
In Canada, our federal government is borrowing and spending tens of billions of dollars a year to make our present lifestyle more agreeable.
This money will have to be repaid by future generations.
Where is your outrage over this theft of wealth from our children?
We say we care about the future, but we don't give a hoot, not when it will seriously cost us in the present.

I don't care about climate change because everything about it is a con.

To those of you committed to climate-change hysteria, take the first step by massively reducing your carbon footprint. Then tell us how we should do the same.

• Become a vegetarian
• Get rid of your house and move to a small apartment.
• Get rid of your car.
• Move closer to work
• Consume less manufactured goods.
• Give up air travel.
• Stop accepting government benefits that are paid for by future generations.

Otherwise ....shut up.

I've written this blog piece not to convince the climate change committed. It is as likely to succeed in that regard as trying to convince a religious zealot that God doesn't exist.

Instead, I've written this for those of you who haven't quite bought into the climate-change hype and to help reinforce your critical thinking in making your mind up.

SNC-Lavalin Affair- Hey Quebec, Payback's a Bitch!

The ongoing political saga over possible political interference by Justin Trudeau and his inner circle of henchpeople has taken on a rather hilarious turn, with Quebecers furious that the rest of Canada seems superbly uninterested in saving the Quebec 'pearl' as it is known reverently in Quebec political circles as well as in the media.

SNC-Lavalin is more than just a company, it is a symbol of Quebec's emergence from a backward farm and natural resource economy to a modern mixed economy.

But SNC-Lavalin, which helped engineer a modern Quebec, did so with the business ethics of ENRON, bribing individuals with millions of dollars of payola as a matter of course, both here in Canada and abroad.
How depraved was SNC-Lavalin is revealed in another exposé of the company and its business practices

"New details have emerged about Quebec engineering giant SNC-Lavalin’s cozy relationship with the son of former Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, including the company allegedly hiring prostitutes for him during a visit to Canada a decade ago.
The sordid tale, revealed by Quebec newspaper La Presse...
Receipts gathered during an investigation of a former SNC-Lavalin executive show $30,000 in payments to Saadi Gadhafi for sexual services in Canada in 2008, La Presse reported."

Let us not single out SNC as the only Quebec bad corporate citizen, an anomaly which had a temporary lapse of executive oversight. The company only demonstrated the prevailing dubious business practices of the time that is was the hallmark of Quebec business society.

"For a Québécois, the SNC-Lavalin-Trudeau-government debacle is especially painful to watch. I can’t help but wonder whether English Canada’s punditocracy would be as indignant if the prime minister’s office had seemingly been trying to save a Toronto- or Calgary-based multinational corporation instead of a Quebec one."  Lise Ravary Montreal gazette

This opinion is repeated in the nationalist Quebec French media ad naseum, where the legal prosecution of misdeeds of SNC-Lavalin is seen as nothing more than Quebec-bashing.

For once I am of the concurring opinion that Canadians are not particularly unhappy to see Quebec get its comeuppance. The deafening roar of protest from Quebec over potential job losses is clearly falling on deaf ears in the rest of Canada.

What does surprise me is the interminable chutzpah of Lise Ravary et al in believing that Canadians owe Quebec a fair hearing and consideration. They are surprised and miffed that Canadians are unsympathetic, this after decades of Canada-bashing (a term unheard of in Quebec) and contempt shown by Quebec politicians and media.

According to Quebec,  Canada should be concerned about the effect of an SNC-Lavalin prosecution and to the potential job losses.

Really???

How concerned was Quebec when it put the kibosh of the Energy-East pipeline without much thought or concern for the economic impact or the job losses in Alberta.

Come to think of it, where were Justin Trudeau and his minion of crooked henchman in working the backrooms to secure said pipeline in an effort to secure Alberta oil-industry jobs and economic prosperity.

Could it be that electoral considerations and the political reality made expending political capital on saving jobs in Alberta just not worth the effort, considering the few seats held by the Liberals in that province?

Could you imagine that if during the pipeline debate a Quebec politician getting up and saying that in considering approval of the Energy-East pipeline, Quebec should consider the economic interest of Alberta and the attached jobs

HA! HA! HA!.

For Quebec politicians and pundits, lobbing political and economic bombs at Canada is just par for the course, business as usual.
Quebec's righteous indignation is almost laughable.

I am reminded of Shakespeare's Shylock, a Jew who has suffered discrimination and now turns the tables on his tormentors.

"The villainy you teach me I will execute, and it shall go hard but I will better the instruction"

That's how Shakespeare termed it.
Today we say....

"Payback's a bitch!

Anothony Housewater Embarrasses Mount-Royal

A bozo smile and an partisan heart...

"The riding is among the strongest Liberal ridings in the country. Réal Caouette, long-time leader of the Social Credit Party in Quebec, once said that a mailbox could win the Liberal nomination in Mount Royal and still win election just because it was red (the traditional colour of the Liberal Party). The Liberals have held the riding continuously since 1940, and have only been seriously threatened three times since then—in 1958, 1984 and 2011."

It's hard to watch a young politician with a seemingly bright future turn so quickly into a sad-sack partisan hack, especially when doing so in the unfamiliar spotlight thrust upon him by circumstances beyond his control and certainly beyond his ken.

Anthony Housefather is the nebbish member of Parliament for Montreal's largely, Jewish riding of Mount-Royal, where winning has little to do with talent and a lot to do with being Jewish and Liberal.
Up to now, Housefather was such an unknown that a renowned LCN French television talking head, Paul Larocque (the French news channel's Wolf Blitzer,) hilariously referred to him as Anthony House'water.' 

Housewater's Housefather's claim to Parliamentary fame is as a Jew, he represents one of the two Canadian ridings that are informally designated as "Jewish seats" where candidates of all major parties are customarily part of the chosen people.

Up to now, he has been toiling away in relative obscurity. But that all changed for Housefather as the unlucky Liberal sap who chairs the House of Commons Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, where he was thrust into the limelight in relation to the ongoing political fiasco that is embroiling the Liberal government concerning the Judy-Raybould Wilson affair.

To make a long story short, the Trudeau cabinet is accused of trying to influence the then Solicitor-General to interfere in an ongoing prosecution of Quebec's infamous engineering firm SNC-Lavalin. While we don't have the facts, as nobody is talking, the optics for the Trudeau government are not particularly good.
Trudeau demoted Raybould Wilson from a prestigious cabinet position with the opposition charging that he did so because she would not play ball and influence government prosecutors to go soft on punishment for the Quebec firm that seems to have been run with Mafia-like business ethics that had bribery as its preferred method of securing contracts.

At any rate, the usually boring and obscure committee, at the direction of Housefather, killed opposition demands that the principle players be brought before the committee to explain their part in the affair.

For this decision Housefather has forever branded himself a partisan party hack without scruples or morals, ready to do his part in burying the truth for political gain.

To make matters worse the buffoon novice put his foot in his mouth when he suggested that the ex-justice minister might have been dropped from the cabinet for her lack of French, a laughable suggestion that even Trudeau felt obligated to deny.

While Housefather apologized for the gaffe, the damage was done, not only to Trudeau but to his own political career where mistakes that embarrass the leader are never forgotten when cabinet choices are considered.

And so Housefather has turned himself into another Sheila Finestone a former Mount-Royal Liberal hack that distinguished herself by her irrelevance, toiling for years in the House of Commons in total obscurity.

With the Liberals down in the polls, it is actually possible that Mount-Royal goes Conservative if a quality candidate is offered. Housefather only managed a 7,000 vote majority over Robert Libman last time around and should the Trudeau scandal endure, Housefather will be hurt as the political hack who defended the indefensible.

Will Jewish voters vote blindly Liberal next time around?  Maybe, but I hope not.

Readers.... a note on an article in the Journal de Montreal by resident hater Richard Martineau who waxes eloquent once again over his favourite subject, "Les Autres"

Martineau was furious because;

"In Côte-Saint-Luc, the city council unanimously passed a resolution in which it declared that it would not respect the "illegitimate and unconstitutional" law of the Caquist government. The mayor has even said that his administration will never consider the dress or religious symbols its employees wear, even if they are in a position of authority! In other words, "F ** K you, Legault! "

The idea that a town council can pass a resolution that contradicts the law of the land infuriated him, especially when those towns are English.

"And I thought that Côte-Saint-Luc is part of Québec! Well, it seems no. It is an undivided republic, an enclave, a reservation, a city-state like the Vatican in Italy. What does it matter if government was elected democratically. Côte-Saint-Luc disrespects Québec and after the religious signs, what is going to be? Will they refuse to accept pre-K for four year olds or 21 years old for pot consumption, Bill 101?

Are municipal governments stronger than the provincial government now? And the little kings who sit in city halls, more powerful than the premier? And wait, this is just the beginning. The same reaction can be expected in Kirkland, Hampstead, Westmount, Pointe-Claire, Dollard-Des-Ormeaux, Dorval, Mount Royal, Beaconsfield ... In these cities, you see, we do not live in Quebec time, but Canada."

 I must say that his agony over the hated English resistance is somewhat comforting to me. His pain as they say, is my gain.

I only have one comment to make or better still a question for Mr. Maritineau.

When the city council of the City of Montreal voted a motion declaring itself a 'sanctuary city,' a motion which clearly contravenes Quebec's civil code, did he offer the same nasty opinion?

SNC-Lavalin... For Quebec, Payback's a Bitch!

Once again the two solitudes of the Canadian reality has reared its ugly linguistic head with reaction in Quebec diametrically opposed to that of the rest of Canada in the Trudeau/SNC-Lavalin affair.

Quebec journalists have been almost universal in complaining that the unsympathetic reaction in the  rest of Canada lies in the entrenched hatred of Quebec.
They contend that would SNC-Lavalin be based in Toronto, public sentiment would be massively in favour of a deal that would see the company avoid a criminal trial in favour of a negotiated settlement, one that would spare the company from being banned from bidding on government contracts for a period of years.

It should be noted that the company is already subject to a ten-year ban by the World Bank following the company’s misconduct in relation to the Padma Multipurpose Bridge Project in Bangladesh, as well as misconduct under another Bank-financed project. Link

The Quebec view;

"Our colleagues in Toronto would be happy to politically block the Trudeau government from saving this Quebec giant," an editorialist wrote this week in the French-language daily Le Devoir, accusing anglophone media of hypocrisy in its indignation at SNC. Link {fr}

"It's all fine and dandy to play politics in an election year, but what would 'Canada' gain if SNC-Lavalin was found guilty?" asked Michel Girard, a business columnist for the tabloid Journal de Montreal.

But I ask you, dear reader, if the street address of SNC-Lavalin’s headquarters were on Bay Street instead of at 455 René-Lévesque Blvd. W. in Montreal, would we be talking about the same scandal today? Lise Ravary

The Rest of Canada view;

Can it be? Can a large, politically sensitive corporation with a history of buying influence avoid prosecution in this country by the mere expedient of a phone call to the prime minister’s office? Can the prime minister’s staff have charges against the corporation dropped by a quick call to the minister of justice? Is that the sort of country we live in? Andrew Coyne

 Here are some comments from readers in the Globe and Mail.

We cannot accept Montreal level corruption on a national scale. .....No net jobs will be lost. Contracts will go to other Canadian companies. 

SNC-Lavalin does not have to do the work. There are plenty of other engineering firms in Canada that can do the job. It is time for companies to suffer the consequences of their actions.

SNC-Lavalin’s record is not good. Why continuously reward them for sleazy behaviour? This needs to be an example case.

At any rate, I'm not sure these Quebecers are wrong, it does seem that Canada has it in for Quebec and while Quebec plays the innocent aggrieved party, Quebec cannot expect any other reaction.

Imagine you have a neighbour who complains to authorities that your lawn is unkempt, your kids are playing on the street and calls the police over perceived noise violations, all the while complaining that the city treats you preferentially.
You see his convertible with the top down in his garage way and its starting to rain.
Do you go over and ring his doorbell or do you laugh and garner an enjoyable measure of schadenfreude ?

I would hope that Canadians, given their reputation for fair-mindedness and consideration would do the right thing and ring the doorbell, but it's clear that those days are over, after forty years of Quebec slagging Canada and pissing in the proverbial Canadian soup pot there's little or no good will left.

While Quebecers chalk up the negative reaction to the inherent meanness of Canadians, it doesn't occur to them at all that they bear any responsibility for the enmity.

Poor Lise Ravery whose lamentations are laughable if not sad for the fact that her opinion is printed in Montreal's daily rag, Le Journal de Montreal, feeding Quebec's persecution complex.

Let me remind Quebecers that they rejected the pipeline from Alberta out of spite and nothing else.
Since there was no tangible benefits to Quebec, other that enriching Alberta and feeding its treasury (which funds the equalization program of which Quebec is the biggest beneficiary,) Quebec saw no benefit other than being a good neighbour, something that means nothing to it.

The blasé and mean-spirited attitude of Quebec does not go un-noticed in the ROC.
While collecting the lion's share of the federal governments largess, Quebec continues to drone on and on with the familiar done-me-wrong refrain.

And so if Madame Ravary et als want Canadians to support an out of court settlement for the criminal activities of its favourite son, they are plumb out of luck.

As it says in the Bible,: "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."

Quebec has been a bad and spiteful neighbour for over forty years and so it should not be surprised, at Canadians reciprocity. I haven't got a comparable French saying so I remind the whiners....

payback's a bitch!....

In Defence of Justin Trudeau

How soon we forget....

You're probably a bit surprised at the title of this blog piece, given my historic hostility towards Justin Trudeau, a politician I loathe on just about every level.

But Trudeau was elected by a majority of Canadians on an ultra-liberal platform much as Trump was elected on a conservative platform. The real problem for both men politically is that recent presidents and prime ministers, regardless of political affiliation governed from the middle, something that seemed to be well tolerated by voters. Not so for these two leaders who quite frankly scare the bejesus out of those who voted against them, generating a river of angst and a firestorm of hate.
Regardless of what opponents think, both men seem safely ensconced, their support perhaps a bit diminished but solid just the same.

I don't dislike Trudeau for his underlying philosophy, one of radical liberalism, after all, he was voted in on that platform, but rather his cynical and dishonest manner in which he plays to and uses the general good will and intentions of Canadians.
Running on a supposedly pro-environment, pro-women, pro-immigrant and natives rights platform, Trudeau has talked a good game but delivered nothing concrete except one whopping budgetary deficit after another, all the while pretending that he is, what clearly he is not and pooh-poohing criticism with a wave of his hand and a toss of his hair like a king on a throne, offering deflections and fairy-tale answers in Parliament, making a mockery of Question Period, all without an ounce of contrition or guilt over his abject dishonesty.

He reminds me of the flim-flam man in that famous movie, the Music Man, whereby a con artist convinces a town of good and naive people that a new pool table installed recently in town will corrupt its youth and render them indigent and troublesome. He then proposes to form a boys marching band to in order to combat the problem,  and of course, sells the band equipment in the bargain.
Justin too is a con, he is not the kind and gentle political progressive he projects. When push comes to shove and political survival is at stake, Justin is as vicious and nasty as they come, dumping his phoney convictions and punishing those who betray him with evil abandon.

Seeing (Wilson-Raybould) being tossed under the bus certainly is a message to First Nations but also to women across Canada.- Chief Bob Chamberlin, Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs

Justin is as phoney as a three-dollar bill and is as manipulative as the best of con men, but in the current blow-up over the resignation of ex-minister Judy Wilson-Raybould he was and is, in fact, acting not only in his and the Liberal party's best interest but that of the country as well.

Justin must not be a student of history, otherwise, he'd know that often it isn't the crime that is so damaging, but rather the coverup as in the Watergate Affair that destroyed the presidency of Richard Nixon.  It wasn't insider trading that sent Martha Stewart to jail, but rather lying about it to the FBI.

In trying to help SNC-Lavelin, Trudeau was looking for political gain, or rather trying to stem a possible political pitfall. Regardless of motive, in my estimation a worthy undertaking.

He tried to intervene in an ongoing criminal prosecution, something that is verboten under the law but can actually be explained away as a necessary evil political necessity. Had he made his case honestly to the Canadian people, he'd be in the clear by now.
But he lied.
He pretended that he did not ask his justice minister to put pressure on federal prosecutors to seek a fine rather than a conviction in the SNC-Lavelin corruption trial, something that would allow the company to survive.

While the opposition parties are having a field day over Justin's woes, it behooves me to ask if they are also opposed to Justin's intervention on behalf of SNC-Lavelin.

Let us examine the underlying facts, legal,  political and economic.

SNC-Lavelin, a large company with thousands of employees has a history of paying bribes to win contracts at home and abroad, with perhaps the most galling bribe, a twenty million payment to executives of a Montreal hospital to secure a contract for the new building.

SNC-Lavelin was born and bred in the corruption-ridden atmosphere of Quebec politics that dates back past the reign of Maurice Duplessis, where every major government contract was tendered with the necessary political or personal bribe attached.
Contracts for snow removal, paving and road building, as well as major buildings and infrastructure, were all subject to the same game of corruption, with engineering firms, construction companies and politicians and government employees all in on the action.

That entrenched system of corruption was exposed in an explosive government enquiry that blew the lid off the sordid system of payola, much to the shock and dismay of hitherto innocent and uninformed Quebecers, especially taxpayers.

There's no forgiving SNC-Lavelin for its dishonesty and corruption which occurred at the highest levels, but the question remains as to whether the Canadian law which imposes sanctions upon conviction including banning the offending company from bidding for government contracts for a period of up to ten years is a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Should the thousands of well-paid and productive employees be sacrificed for the errors and criminality of their bosses?
Should SNC-Lavelin be destroyed through a criminal process that would see the company reduced to rubble?

Let us examine the cases of Wells-Fargo in the United States, a company that openly and systematically defrauded its own customers. The United States Justice Department issued a fine of one billion dollars, but did not, in the interest of financial benefit to the country and the company's employees make any attempt to restrict the company's ability to continue.
The same goes for Volkswagen which negotiated a $2.8 billion fine for its scheme to fool regulators over its car emissions.

Just like SNC- Lavelin, plenty of individuals in the company faced the legal music for their malfeasance, but the companies both went on to live. I would remind readers that it was a stunning fall from grace for former SNC-Lavalin CEO Pierre Duhaime who plead guilty to breach of trust in a Montreal courthouse, so it's not like the company bosses got off scott-free.

So Trudeau tried to get his justice minister to put pressure on crown prosecutors to come to some sort of similar arrangement with SNC-Lavelin, one that would allow the company to survive after a massive fine.
He wasn't supposed to do it, but I applaud him for the effort. That is what Prime Ministers are supposed to do, that is to fight for the survival of an important Canadian employer, for the benefit of employees and the economic well-being of the country.

As for Judy Wilson Raybould, her refusal to do Trudeau's dirty work is understandable but ultimately counter-productive to the well-being of the country.
When at first Trudeau demoted her, I assumed it was out of retribution but have come to realize that it was rather to install another minister more attuned to doing what Trudeau (and myself) rightly deemed necessary.

It is perhaps ironic that for all Trudeau's ridiculous and downright stupid policy gaffes and wasteful spending, he is being skewered for something that actually makes sense.

Sometimes politicians do some pretty under-handed manoeuvres to secure a good outcome. I invite readers to take in the film "Lincoln" starring Daniel-Day Lewis, chronicling his back-room deals, many underhanded and illegal, in an effort to pass the 13th amendment which freed the Black slaves.
The same goes for the film "All the Way" starring Brian Cranston as LBJ who also used some pretty under-handed methods to pass his greatest achievement, the Civil Right's Act.

I won't put Justin in the same room with these guys, but I hope readers will understand that behind closed cabinet doors some pretty dirty machinations are undertaken, hopefully for the greater good.

In the case of Justin and SNC-Lavelin, he is in the right, fighting for its survival. He is paying the political price for having those machinations undertaken by himself on its behalf spill out from the cabinet cone of silence.

I can't say I feel bad for him but remain amused that his undoing may be over what I characterize as good and necessary intervention, instead of over his many idiotic policy failures.

Now many of you, especially those in the rest of Canada have a sore spot for Quebec companies that receive preferential treatment, but I would beg you to consider this.

Even without corruption, SNC-Lavelin is a profitable tax-paying giant that employs thousands of hard-working men and women who honestly work at a high level, providing for their families and paying their fair share of taxes.
SNC-Lavelin cheated and should be punished, but killing it off because of ill-conceived laws that are out of step with our competitive allies is wrong. It is a disservice to its employees and the taxpayers of Canada.

Regardless of the motives or methods, I applaud Justin Trudeau for his effort to save the company.