Were the Innu bribed for the Muskrat Falls Vote?

The Innu communities of Labrador, Sheshatsui and Natuashish, are tight communities. Understanding what is taking place, or has taken place there is difficult at best. With a total population of 2245 people according to the 2011 census, everybody knows everybody and large families dominate the political and economic life in the communities. Therefore, getting accurate information of what is happening there is almost impossible for outsiders. This article is made possible by a number of Innu who have broken that code of silence and taken me into their confidence - for that I'm thankful to them as we should all be.

In the early 1980's Peter Penashue and two other people Incorporated a body politic now called the "Innu Nation". Essentially, the Innu Nation's purpose was to act as a quasi-government for the Innu people, because without a finalized land claim the two communities could only represent themselves and not the overall interests of the Innu in Labrador. The first real major financial victory for the Innu Nation came with the Voisey's Bay Agreement.

The Innu had tried to stop it until they had a land claim in place, but the courts ruled it could proceed and an impacts and benefits agreement was put in place. As part of that agreement the Innu would receive quarterly royalty payments from the provincial government of 5% of Vale's Voisey Bay sales and $59 million for the Teshipitakan Fund (T-Fund). The T-Fund was created soley as a fund for future generations (ie: the Innu children). As of February 4, 2011 the fund had grown to $66 million. Revenues from Voisey's Bay are split 3 ways: 50% to the T Fund (Innu Nation); 25% to the Sheshatsui Community Fund; and 25% to the Natuashish Community Fund.

The trustees of the fund, members from each Innu community and the Innu Nation, have been trying to gain access to the children's trust for some time. Minutes of their meetings show a determined effort by Paul Rich, brother-in-law of Peter Penashue, to take $25 million from the fund to build houses. The money was to be split evenly between the communities. He had no support but managed to have the trustees lawyers give an opinion. The only way to pull money from the trust was to prove a "man-made disaster" had occurred. He tried to have the housing issue put in that context. The issue was so divisive the trustees were read the Trust's mission statement, and they reviewed their trustee's Oath of Office. The trustees were cautioned by the manager to remove their "biases (personal and political)". They were reminded that the principal of the Trust could not be touched in any case.

On February 7, 2011, Paul Rich motioned the idea of getting a loan for the money and using the Trust as collateral. It was agreed that this course would be explored. It was also agreed the Bank of Montreal, the representative of the Trust, would look into the matter. On February 14, 2011 Paul Rich put forward a motion to lend the $25 million from the Trust. During discussions the concern of money being used for payouts to community members rather than housing was brought up. The motion was defeated 4-2 in a recorded vote.

During the May 10, 2011 meeting it was discussed and agreed to that public meetings would be held in each community in the middle of June - just weeks before the referendum on the New Dawn Agreement. On May 26, 2011 it was agreed the meetings would be held in the first week of June with expenses for planes, halls, and lunches to be funded. Then, during a Trust meeting on June 3, 2011, just days before the meeting were to take place, they were cancelled.

This is were it gets very interesting. On July 6, 2011, less than a week after the New Dawn vote, the trustees held a teleconference. The issue again was money, but this time it was different. The following motion, the only apparent topic on the agenda, was made:

" Paul Rich made the following motion: The Trust hereby agrees to apply for a loan for approximately $12,500,000 from the Bank of Montreal to provide a per capita payout of $5,000 to each member of the Innu Nation. It was seconded by Mary Jane Edmonds. BMO Trust Company, the corporate trustee, abstained from voting because of the conflict of interest with the application for a loan from the Bank of Montreal.  All other trustees voted in favour and the motion was carried."

So, less than a week after the Innu voted 88% in favour of the New Dawn Agreement, a $5,000 payment was authorized to every man, woman, and child - motioned by non other than Peter Penashue's brother-in-law. There are a few points to digest on this. Firstly, there was discussion during the meeting to have $5,000 payments for children placed in trust - that was summarily ignored in the motion. Secondly, and quite shockingly so, no reason was given for the payout in the minutes anywhere. Thirdly, the average annual income of the Innu people, according to last available census data, is approximately $12,000. Now consider the following facts:

Sheshatsui

population 1,314
ages:
0-4      200
5-9      130
10-14  150
15-19  115

total children 695 or 53% of the population

Natuashish

population 931
ages:
0-4      145
5-9      125
10-14  90
15-19  100

total children 460 or 49% of the population

Based on this census data, $6,775,000 of the $15,000,000 would go to children - or their parents on their behalf. To put that in perspective for some, the following are family sizes in:

Sheshatsui

2 people  100
3 people  95
4 people  60
5 people  80

Natuashish

2 people  65
3 people  60
4 people  50
5 people  55

Keeping in mind the average ANNUAL income in both communities is less than $12,000 per year, many families and individuals were about to hit the jackpot. For example, families with 5 people living in a household looked to receive $25,000.

On July 8, 2011, a formal meeting of the trustees was held. It was announced at that meeting that the Bank of Montreal had approved the loan for $12,500,000 for the $5,000 payout to each Innu. The bank, however, said it would take some time to process the loan. Paul Rich then motioned:

"Paul Rich made the following motion: To advance money from the Teshipitakan Fund to provide money for the per capita payout, and the money advanced from the Fund will be replaced once the loan money is available. The motion was seconded by Gregory Rich. BMO Trust Company, the corporate trustee, abstained from voting because of the conflict of interest with the application for a loan from the Bank of Montreal.  All other trustees present voted in favour and the motion was carried. The trustees were advised that tomorrow is the earliest the funds could be advanced. Janet will discuss with Lorraine Rich and Karen Penunsi about how much money to hold back. Only the amount that we are paying out will be sent to the band office."

In a somewhat incredible twist of events, a sum of $25,000,000 for housing was changed to a sum of $12,500,000 for individual $5,000 payments, days after the New Dawn was successfully approved by referendum, and motioned by Paul Rich - Peter Penashue's brother-in-law. The Peter behind the Muskrat Falls dam as it were. Interestingly, if you do the math, $5000 multiplied by 2245 people comes out to $11,225,000 leaving $775,000 left over. It appears that the early concerns of some trustees that this housing money would be used for personal payouts was warranted after all. It was noted in the minutes that once a major loan was drawn using the children's trust as collateral no other loan could be made in a similar fashion. So, after the New Dawn payout was made the housing crisis was to remain a housing crisis. The sudden reward for voting in favour of the New Dawn, or so it would appear, and the sudden rush to get the money into the hands of the Innu, robbed the future trustees of any ability to leverage that fund for any other purpose. As an aside, the trustees are currently trying to amend the terms of the trust so they can gain access directly to its funds.

The questions that now surround the New Dawn Agreement, which was necessary for the Muskrat Falls project to proceed, are many. Most seem to centre on what happened during the referendum to approve the New Dawn Agreement. It is illegal to offer a reward or bribe to people for voting in favour of a particular thing. It appears quite obvious this $5,000 per person payment was a big reward for some of the poorest people in Canada. There has been many stories of voting money and alcohol bribes to get the Innu to vote in favour of the New Dawn Agreement. In the end though, without sworn affidavits from the Innu themselves, these remain just stories. However, the $5000 per person payments just days after the vote, and sudden in its conception, leads to the inevitable conclusion that these funds were either a reward or a promise of reward fulfilled. That is my take on it. I have also been advised the RCMP were provided with all the documentation surrounding this issue a year ago, but have done nothing in the way of an investigation or forensic audit. If bribery or reward was used on some of the poorest people in the country to push forward the Muskrat Falls dam project, well, that is just unjustifiable in a country that we think we understand. Surely our provincial government knew these payments had taken place. It goes against our laws, our core beliefs, and everything we believe in as a people.

Riadh Ben Aissa, Danny Williams, and SNC Lavalin

Riadh Ben Aissa (Aissa) has become a very well known name around Canada and the world. The former Vice-President of SNC Lavalin's Construction Division and international salesman/fixer is currently sitting in a Swiss prison. He is being investigated for a multitude of sins which include, among other things, channeling funds through offshore accounts for bribes and his close relationship with the Gadhaffi family of Libya. He was characterized early on in the SNC corruption scandal as a rogue executive and fired. However, as time has marched on it has become clear that he in fact was simply doing the job SNC paid him to - grease the wheels to get contracts (primarily internationally). So far there has been one major bribe in Canada revealed - the Montreal hospital $22 million payment.

You may ask: "What does Aissa have to do with Newfoundland and Labrador?" The truth is a lot more than we know or have been told. Have you ever heard the man's name brought up in the context of this province? Likely not - until now. It starts with BAE Newplan Group Ltd - or rather it's forefathers. BAE Newplan Group Ltd is the result of Newplan Consultants Ltd merging with Newplan Holdings Ltd, and then merging with BAE Group Ltd. The merged company, BAE-SNC Limited, was then a SNC Lavalin subsidiary in this province. It had two directors of note:

1) Elwood J. Ried - was the President of BAE Newplan until he died suddenly in June, 2012. He and fellow BAE executive Albert Williams formed a numbered company in 2009 to construct the condo  known as "The Narrows" in St. John's; and

2) RIADH BEN AISSA - yes that's what I said - the man of international intrigue and money laundering offshore accounts.

Here is the document from the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador Corporate Registry (CADO):

Dr. Rafik Ben Aissa, Aissa's surgeon brother put it this way:

"Absolutely nothing my brother has done was unknown to the board of SNC-Lavalin. Unfortunately, when it comes to keeping money and business deals going, discrimination, lies, and injustice have sometimes no international limits."

Of course this immediately places many of the deals done in Newfoundland and Labrador over the last twenty years under the microscope. The first question is why would this man in charge of international construction with headquarters in Tunisia, who did mega deals all over the world, be one of two directors in this tiny Newfoundland company? That's a big question. Certainly SNC Lavalin did a lot of business in the province from the mid 1990's on. They have secured a number of contracts with Newfoundland and Labrador Power ( a Crown corporation) and also with its successor Nalcor. Billions of dollars in business. It is alleged that $22 million dollars in bribes were channelled through a Carribean country for SNC to secure the Montreal hospital contract - worth about $1.5 billion and handled by Aissa. Using that as a yard stick, what could be the bribes involved in a $6.5 billion or so contract? SNC secured that contract just after former Premier Williams left office.

Aissa's Newfoundland involvement has some more direct, and problematic questions that need to be addressed. For starters there is the founding of Innu-SNC Lavalin Corp - a joint corporation formed by the Innu Nation (a non-governmental but still government-like organization) and SNC Lavalin. The Board of Directors consists of: Albert Williams (BAE Newplan/SNC VP of Strategy and Development); Steve Lindley (VP of Aboriginal Affairs at SNC); Prote Poker (Innu Chief); and Anastasia Qupee (Innu Chief). The Corporation was formed February, 2008. According to the corporate registry Aissa was still a director of BAE Newplan at that time. In September 2008, the New Dawn Agreement was signed between the Innu Nation, Nalcor, and the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador to pave the way for the Lower Churchill hydroelectric project. Both Prote Poker and Anastasia Qupee signed the agreement along with then Deputy Grand Chief of the Innu Nation Peter Penashue.

Peter Penashue, elected as an MP in 2011 under the Conservative banner has subsequently had to resign for improper/illegal campaign donations - almost all his donations were corporate which he subsequently tried to cover up, but the cover up was rejected by Elections Canada. One very questionable issue for him was the illegal interest-free loan granted by the Innu Development Limited Partnership (the unincorporated head organization that administers all the "partnership" organizations the Innu Nation enters into - like Innu/SNC Inc. for example). Elections Canada reports there is no paper trail for this $25,000 other than a single letter, signed by Penashue's brother-in-law, that says a loan was given to Penashue by the Innu Development Limited Partnership. Of course this can not be true as the Partnership is not incorporated and so cannot have a bank account from which to lend money. He is now running in the by-election that he created by resigning over the fiasco.

However, the bigger question remains: Were Peter Penashue, Prote Poker, and/or Anastasia Qupee in a conflict of interest while negotiating the New Dawn Agreement on behalf of their people? Did their board membership on the Innu/SNC corporation create a very obvious pecuniary conflict of interest? My opinion is if they were paid to be on that board then without question. My understanding is they are paid to be on that Board. Were they also in the same conflict of interest when they sold the agreement to their people so they would endorse it by referendum and thereby give it legitimacy? Again, I would say yes. What role did Aissa play in this as director of SNC's outpost in the province? It's difficult to know that without a thorough RCMP investigation. One thing is certain - BAE-SNC Limited was still in existence at that time and so was Aissa.

Then there is the issue of our former Premier Danny Williams. As stated in a previous blog, Williams had two offshore service companies: Spectrol Energy Services (with a Texas Subsidiary); and Atlanic XL. Both companies had William's brother Edward, recently appointed to the Canada Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Board (CNLOPB) after leaving the Premier's office as an advisor, on their Board of Directors. This remained the case even after they were put in a "blind trust". Both companies gained lucrative contracts in the offshore oil developments around the province while Williams was Premier. Williams negotiated many of these agreements, including the necessity of using Newfoundland and Labrador companies - not unlike Penashue and his family's dealings and the Lower Churchill Impact and Benefits Agreement. The direct result was his companies grew and prospered - as did Penashue's family business interests.

On December 31, 2008 BAE-SNC Limited was voluntarily dissolved as a corporation. A new corporation was formed to take its place - BAE Newplan Group Limited. Why the one containing Aissa as director was dissolved and another created to take its place is puzzling. The new corporation has a directorship of four (all senior SNC people) as opposed to two at the old company. In any case it dissolved, as did the formal traces of Aissa in Newfoundland and Labrador. Four months later SNC Lavalin purchased Danny Williams offshore service companies for an undisclosed amount. The deal, secret as it remains, could have been constructed to give Williams an artificially high value for his companies - a common practise in corporate corruption prosecutions world-wide. We simply do not know. What we do know is the man at the centre of SNC's corruption practices had effective control of SNC's one subsidiary in the province at the time. We know his reputation. Williams was prepared to place himself in a conflict of interest by negotiating offshore agreements while owning companies that would benefit from the Newfoundland and Labrador policies of those agreements. Newfoundland and Labrador's conflict of interest legislation states:

"Statutory duty

3. A public office holder shall not make or participate in making a decision in his or her capacity as a public office holder where the public office holder knows or ought reasonably to know that in the making of the decision there is the opportunity to benefit himself or herself or a member of his or her family improperly, directly or indirectly. "

 

Four months later, then Libyan leader, and personal/professional friend of Aissa and SNC, Moammar Gadhaffi, announced he wished to stay overnight in St. John's of all places. Apparently it was simply a refueling stop enroute back to Libya after speaking at the United Nations. Of course any person with a sense of direction realizes Libya is southeast of New York, and to travel several hours north makes no sense on the face of it. Williams was also very, very silent on the issue. While the Canadian government threatened Gadhaffi with lectures on terrorism the provincial government, and Williams, simply refused to comment. It is apparent that Gadhaffi was a man of deliberate action and it would be hard to attribute such a visit to shear coincidence based on a really poor sense of direction. What is more likely is Gadhaffi wanted to meet with Williams, or some person/people associated with Williams based on his friendship with Aissa. It was apparent that it made some people very nervous. Gadhaffi was so incensed by the treatment he was to receive should he stay in Canada that he threatened to nationalize Petro Canada's assets in Libya. He eventually changed his mind, but he was clearly insulted by the treatment of his potential hosts.

 

What other influences could Aissa have exerted in this province while a director of BAE? Well there is the whole political donation thing. Over the last 17 years BAE has donated a total of $239,170.00 dollars to political parties here. The receiving parties have been the PCs and the Liberals while the NDP have not received a cent. The Liberals received $111,965.00 - primarily from 1996-2000. The PCs received $127,205.00 - $113,800.00 after 2000 when Williams became leader of the PCs. Those dollar figures put BAE in the top three of political donors in Newfoundland and Labrador. They donated every year from 1996-2011. They donated in by-elections. They donated in elections, but only to one party - the one that won. Some interesting donations of note: Ed Byrne ($2000 in 2003-he became Minister of Natural Resources under Williams); Jerome Kennedy ($1000 in the 2006 Quidi Vidi by-election and again in elections-has been Minister of Finance and Natural Resources); Terry French ( ranging from $500 to $2000 in various elections and one by-election - served a number of Ministries including Environment); Paul Davis ( on numerous elections - responsible for Government purchasing); and several others. Bottom line, all of these people that received political donations had involvement with the Lower Churchill project and accepted donations from a company directly involved with it.

 

Should the RCMP be investigating the Riadh Ben Aissa relationships with: the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador; Nalcor; Danny Williams sale of his offshore companies; the Innu involvement with SNC and the New Dawn Agreement; etc? My opinion is yes. The conflicts of interest are obvious. Aissa's reputation as the guy that greases the wheels is established. His own brother does not deny that. A month or so ago contacts from Labrador to St. John's were floating news that SNC's office in St. John's was emptied out early in the day and staff told not to come back for that day. VOCM talk show host Paddy Daly twittered that he had heard rumours the RCMP raided SNC's St. John's office.

 

Could be that the RCMP have already become aware of something we were not - Aissa's reputation and his ties to Newfoundland and Labrador.

 

 

 

 

 

.

The New Dawn Agreement-Hidden in plain sight

On the 26th day of September, 2008, almost four years to the day, the New Dawn Agreement was signed between the government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Nalcor, and the Innu Nation. It was meant to satisfy the constitutional requirement of consultation with aboriginal people when their lands are affected by proposed developments. For good measure, this agreement included compensation for the Upper Churchill development, which they were not consulted on in the 1960s, and an Impacts and Benefit Agreement (IBA) to compensate for the proposed Lower Churchill Development. On the face of it, and certainly in the reporting of it, the New Dawn Agreement is a long bit of long overdue justice for the Innu people, but is that all it is?


I began studying the Agreement in an effort to find clues on the financing of Muskrat Falls. The question in my mind was:
Is there any place in the last 5 years that the government of this province would have to expose itself, throw some cards on the table as it were, with regard to its plans on financing Muskrat Falls. The New Dawn Agreement fell into that category. If the Agreement's purpose was to lay out compensation for the Lower Churchill Development, then surely it must also include factors restricting that compensation. Here is what I found:


" (v) After Debt Net Cashflow is to be determined as follows, with all elements of the calculation related to the generation comonent of the Project and determined using Canadian Generally Accepted Accounting Principles ("GAAP"):

(1) Gross revenues, less transmission costs for market access including any applicable open access
transmission tarrifs and related upgrades; minus
(2) all operational and maintenance expenses and related charges, excluding depreciation and
amoratization on capital assets; minus
(3) all debt service costs related to the Project with respect to financing in place at First Commercial
Power, both Project and equity related, including but not limited to principal repayments, interest
guarantee fees, issuance fees and all other financing fees tat may be charged from time to time; minus
(4) All debt service costs related to borrowings subsequent to that in place at First Commercial Power,
both Project and equity related, including but not limited to principle repayments, interest, guarantee
fees issuance fees, and other financing fees that may be charged from time to time; minus
(5) refinancing fees and related costs; miuns
(6) preferred dividends (related to financing) incurred during the year; minus
(7) income and other taxes paid and payable during the year; minus
(8) capital expenditures incurred during the year; minus
(9) an allowance for decommissioning costs.


The " (6) preferred dividends (related to financing)" caught my attention. Ed Martin, CEO of Nalcor, has stated publicly that, in regard to traditional financing for Muskrat Falls:
"No question about it, and as I mentioned before, we have the lead arranger in place and this is all bid stuff. So whoever comes forward with financing we're going to use the cheapest financing."


Fair enough. Sounds reasonable and prudent. Just one problem. Preferred dividends are paid out to investers based on the issuing of preferred shares by that corporation. In other words, its not bid stuff handled by a neutral third party arranger. Its a deliberate act by a corporation to give up some amount of ownership to other interests (almost always private) in exchange for raising money. Preferred dividends are normally fixed and entitle the holder of those shares first payment before common shareholders on dividends ( which is why preferred dividends are included in the New Dawn Agreement to be deducted before the Innu get their share) In the case of Nalcor that would constitute a form of privitization.

Which brings me to the other part of the New Dawn Agreement that directly ties into this strategy:

" (c) In the event the parent company of CFLCO sells any of its common shares the Innu Nation shall be entitled to receive three percent (3%) of the proceeds received from the sale of those shares...
(d) If CFLCO issues a new class of shares with the purpose of diluting the value of the the dividend on common shares referred to in section 2(b), above, the Innu Nation's share of dividends is to be calculated as if the new class of shares had not been issued."
This section deals with the effects of selling or issuing new shares in CFLCO for the purpose of outlining how that would effect the Innu's bottom line on the Upper Churchill portion of the deal. However, it still points to the fact Nalcor is envisioning a sale of shares that would dilute its control over CFLCO, which is a privitization.

I asked Nalcor for a comment on this story, and they sent me the following response:
" This provision allowed Nalcor or its subsidiaries flexibility to issue preferred shares should that way of financing prove feasible and appropriate... There are no specific plans to do so at present. This is not a privitization or a royalty trust."
When I followed up with a question asking who they would sell these shares to if it proved feasible and appropriate they would not answer.

It seems clear that Nalcor is contemplating a preferred share issuance in CFLCO to in part fund the Muskrat Falls project. Preferred shares can be utilized on their own, or as part of a Royalty Trust. Nalcor, as a crown corporation, has shown us a part of its hand. We haven't seen the whole hand as yet. We don't know what rules the government has placed on Nalcor and the lead arranger. Is there a required Newfoundland and Labrador component? Ed Martin has already said it must be the cheapest form of financing. Royalty Trusts and preferred shares are normally cheaper, especially in the long term, than traditional bank financing.

Will the government attempt to shield the details of financing Muskrat Falls with Bill 29? In regard to royalties it now states:
" Section 27 of the Act is repealed and the following substituted:
(2) The head of a public body shall refuse to disclose to an applicant information that was obtained on a tax return, gathered for the purpose of determining tax liability or collecting a tax, or royalty information submitted on royalty returns, except where the information is non-identifying aggregate royalty information."

In other words, Nalcor is a public body, and it is forbidden by law to disclose royalty information submitted on royalty returns. Thanks to the sudden and determined passing of Bill 29 by the provincial government.

We live in a time of secrecy in Newfoundland and Labrador. A secrecy designed to protect the interests of certain people and companies involved in the Muskrat Falls project. This little bit was hidden in plain sight.